What remains is for these evil men to be brought to justice and tried for their crimes against American law, the Constitution and humanity. We have long hoped that the day would come when these sinister evil doers would start turning on each other and the truth would begin spilling out.

Enter the 28 pages and the Saudis. Reportedly, the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 report implicate the Saudis for at least helping to fund the terror attacks, but those 28 pages conveniently make no mention of Israeli involvement in the planning and execution of the attacks that day. The dancing Mossad agents who were arrested, sent back to Israel after ten weeks and who then admitted on Israeli TV, “We were there to document the event“.

No mention of them.

The decision has been made to throw the Saudis under the bus for the event that has up to this point, been blamed solely on Muslims. But the official 9/11 fable is now in the process of collapsing like a house of cards, and that house of cards is now coming down as fast as WTC-7.

In my interview with Harley Schlanger on May 20th we discussed this in some detail. I told Harley, “all of this is being orchestrated to throw Saudi Arabia under the bus, whilst never mentioning Israel.” Harley’s response could not have been more prescient.

The Saudi press is still furious over the U.S. Senate’s unanimous vote approving a bill that allows the families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia. This time, the London-based Al-Hayatdaily has claimed that the U.S. planned the attacks on the World Trade Center in order to create a global war on terror.

The article, written by Saudi legal expert Katib al-Shammari and translated by MEMRI, claims that American threats to expose documents that prove Saudi involvement in the attacks are part of a long-standing U.S. policy that he calls “victory by means of archives.”

Al-Shammari claims that the U.S. chooses to keep some cards close to its chest in order to use them at a later date. One example is choosing not to invade Iraq in the 1990s and keeping its leader, Saddam Hussein, alive to use as “a bargaining chip” against other Gulf States. Only once Shi’ism threatened to sweep the region did America act to get rid of Hussein “since they no longer saw him as an ace up their sleeve.”

He claims that the 9/11 attacks were another such card, enabling the U.S. to blame whoever suited its needs at a particular time; first it blamed Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, then Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq, and now Saudi Arabia.

September 11 is one of winning cards in the American archives, because all the wise people in the world who are experts on American policy and who analyze the images and the videos [of 9/11] agree unanimously that what happened in the [Twin] Towers was a purely American action, planned and carried out within the U.S. Proof of this is the sequence of continuous explosions that dramatically ripped through both buildings. … Expert structural engineers demolished them with explosives, while the planes crashing [into them] only gave the green light for the detonation – they were not the reason for the collapse. But the U.S. still spreads blame in all directions.

The intention of the attacks, writes al-Shammari in his conspiracy article, was to create “an obscure enemy – terrorism – which became what American presidents blamed for all their mistakes” and that would provide justification for any “dirty operation” in other countries.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

I still cannot believe that some Americans are stupid enough to insist our government had nothing to do with this travesty. Those po folks need a good ass whup’n

[mailto:montezumaconstitution@gmail.com] We left off our previous discussion with the 12 people who met in Annapolis Maryland in September of 1786. We learned that of the twelve, John Dickinson, a man who refused to sign the Declaration of Independence and supported England in the Revolutionary War was elected Chairman of that group unanimously. It also should be noted that John Dickinson drafted the Articles of Confederation in 1776, was a delegate to the Convention of 1787, but had a proxy sign the constitution in his stead.

We learned this convention had been called after the Congress found no interest in amending the Articles of Confederation as requested by Alexander Hamilton and it was apparent these twelve representatives wished to circumvent the Congress in their desire to “strengthen” the government and give it more “energy.”

History reveals that when men seek to strengthen and energize government, they do so believing such actions will benefit them directly and seldom if ever benefit those being governed.

Most interesting is that two delegates to the Annapolis Convention; Hamilton and Madison, would, along with John Jay, assume the title of Federalists when in truth their designs for a future government were anything but federal and were strongly nationalist or monarchical. Their presentations for a new form of government in the Convention of 1787 are proof positive.

Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay wrote the Federalist Papers which are revered today by many. The problem is: these essays were simply an ad campaign or a marketing strategy to convince the people to accept the new constitution absent a Bill of Rights. Look at what the Federalist trio actually did, not what they said or wrote. The Federalist Papers were not read widely in other states before the Constitution was ratified.

When the nationalists/monarchists, masquerading as Federalists, left Annapolis in September of 1786, their goal was to completely overhaul the ruling documents and create a more centralized form of government while scrapping the restrictive Articles of Confederation. But, they knew presenting their plan as such would not gather the support they needed to secure delegates to a convention they intended to control.

The delegates to the Annapolis Convention were able to convince Congress that the Articles of Confederation were deficient and needed a convention of states to recommend amendments. These delegates were fully aware that in order to get a majority of people to vote contrary to their own interests, coercion of some form was absolutely necessary and the means of coercion were not to be found in the Articles. What occurred with the scrapping of the Articles of Confederation and the introduction of the Constitution was a counter-revolution to our War for Independence. The new Constitution provided a strong nationalist document with unlimited taxing powers. Not significantly different from the form of government the colonists had endured under King George III.

Historian Sheldon Richmond* said this relating to what the presentation of the Constitution as opposed to amending the Articles of Confederation actually accomplished.

“…it was a counter-revolution, in many ways a reversal of the radical achievement represented by America’s break with the British empire. The constitutional counter-revolution was the work not of radicals, but of conservatives who sought, in the words of Robert Morris, the ambitious nationalist Superintendent of Finance under the Articles of Confederation, a nation of “power, consequence, and grandeur.”

Like politicians of all ages in history, the nationalists/monarchists knew that to accomplish their goals, subterfuge was required. (Wait until we pass it, then we can see what is in it) Therefore, the rallying call for the Philadelphia Convention in May of 1787 was formed on the idea of “amending” the Articles of Confederation.

Notwithstanding the rhetoric of the nationalists/monarchist’s concerns of the weakness and inability to deal with issues of commerce and trade, when boiled down to the lowest common denominator, the real issue they had with the Articles was a lack of ability to coerce the populace to accommodate their political agenda. This excerpt from a letter from George Washington to John Jay in August of 1786 well illustrates my contention.

“We have probably had too good an opinion of human nature in forming our confederation. Experience has taught us, that men will not adopt and carry into execution measures the best calculated for their own good without the intervention of a coercive power.

Many are of the opinion, that Congress have too frequently made use of the suppliant, humble tone of requisition in applications to the States when they had a right to assert their imperial dignity and command obedience.”

The implication found in this short passage reveals the nationalists/monarchists belief the leaders of this new country had the “right to assert their imperial dignity” and to “command obedience” from the people. Not much different in structure and idealism from the words pouring forth from the political leaders of today.

The State of North Carolina is now fighting an edict from the central government to allow perverts in the restrooms and showers of their state while a federal judge this week issued a ruling requiring the State of Kansas to grant voting rights to people who cannot prove their citizenship; A perfect example of the central government “commanding obedience” from the states.

It is important to know that the Congress of the State of Massachusetts when initially asked to provide delegates to a convention that would strengthen the Articles of Confederation responded thusly:

“More power in Congress has been the cry from all quarters, but especially of those whose views, not being confined to a government that will best promote the happiness of the people, are extended to one that will afford lucrative employment, civil and military. Such a government is an aristocracy which would require a standing army and a numerous train of pensioners to prop and support its exalted administration.”

The nationalists/monarchists, posing as Federalists, must have been incensed at those words. John Jay wrote to George Washington:

“Private rage for property suppresses public considerations, and personal rather than national interests have become the great objects of attention.”

Is this not the identical argument that is now centered around events such as the attacks by the BLM and the USFS on private property rights? Are we not continually forced to accept the loss of rights and property for the “national interests?” The “private rage for property” rights recently landed several members of the Bundy family and journalist Pete Santilli in jail, the Hammonds in prison and LaVoy Finicum in his grave.

James Madison urged George Washington to allow his name [Washington] to appear on the list of delegates to the Constitutional Convention even though Washington had expressed his doubts about attending due to a prior commitment to the Order of the Cincinnatus. Madison would submit his proposal, known as the Virginia Plan, to Washington by mail in April of 1787 along with a letter which contained the following phrase:

“…the right of coercion should be expressly declared.”

Madison knew that Washington’s name as a delegate would create the much-needed confidence in the people for the upcoming convention. Washington did eventually attend the convention.

The fact Madison had written and eventually transmitted to Washington and others his plan for a new form of government before the convention began could certainly be considered prima facie evidence the nationalists/monarchists intended from the beginning to scrap the Articles of Confederation for a more centralized, nationalistic (read coercive) form of government.

The majority of the 74 delegates initially selected by their state legislators to attend the 1787 convention believed they were to travel to Philadelphia to “amend the Articles of Confederation.”

It should be noted the convention did not begin on time and it was the 25th of May before a quorum of states was seated; 19 of the selected delegates never attended a single session; New Hampshire’s delegation was two months late in arriving.

Conspicuously missing from the delegates who were in attendance when the convention began were several among those we refer to as “founding fathers.” Thomas Jefferson was in France; John Adams was in England; Thomas Paine, Samuel Adams, and John Hancock do not appear to have been invited while Patrick Henry, who was selected, chose not to attend, stated he, “smelt a rat in Philadelphia, tending toward the Monarchy.” What an astute, prescient statement by Patrick Henry!

Henry, who had been greeted with the chant “treason” from those in attendance when he presented his objections to the Stamp Act in the Virginia House of Burgesses while comparing King George III to Julius Caesar and Charles I, was now challenging Madison, Hamilton, and Jay who wanted to reestablish a monarchical form of government on the ashes of the Articles of Confederation and nullify the long bloody war for independence.

When it comes to the quest for Liberty, it should be noted that Nationalist Benjamin Rush from Pennsylvania, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a member of the Pennsylvania Ratification Convention and the father of American psychiatry, diagnosed the passion for liberty as a form of mental illness. He wrote,

“The extensive influence which these opinions [excited by the excess passion for liberty] had upon the understandings, passions, and morals of many of the citizens of the United States constituted a species of insanity which I shall take the liberty of distinguishing by the name of Anarchia.”

Benjamin Rush, in order to counteract this “species of insanity,” induced by a love of liberty, taught his pupils they were, “public property.” Noted by political activist David Barton as “The Father of Public Schools Under the Constitution” Rush had this to say about the children of the founding era,

“Let our pupil be taught that he does not belong to himself, but that he is public property. Let him be taught to love his family, but let him be taught at the same time that he must forsake and even forget them when the welfare of his country requires it.”

All this from the man David Barton presents as a devout Christian in his writings and DVD series.

Can you feel it? Can you feel the chains encircling the world as you know it, causing it to shrink into a passing wisp of memory as we drift closer and closer each day into a homogeneous goo of anonymity in which nothing is wrong and nothing is right unless we are told it is by the state, and anything goes except for what is honest and true and valid?

We are instructed in the ways in which we must act, react and recover. State-approved responses in a state-generated manual. And we comply. We comply because that is what we have been taught all of our lives. We know no differently. The ones who remembered and shared their stories are long past gone, and we do not mourn their loss. We are the new generation of enlightened, politically correct citizens of corporate USA. Why? Because that is simply what it is.

We have a set of laws; an instruction manual. Statute and Code. We are expected to know them. ‘Ignorance of the law is no excuse.’ Yet, it is impossible to know each and every regulation within the law, and therefore, impossible to know if/when, at any given moment we are in violation. Especially when the rules change. Even the ones that you thought you knew yesterday are different today. So there you are. Wanting to be an obedient citizen, and because you do not know the unknowable, that does not relieve you of the responsibility to do so. That is your job. Your duty towards the corporate state.

And if you are in, you are in. No turning back. Once the gates close, you, my friend, are property of the state. Owned. Your life lies firmly in the hands of those put in place to ensure conformity to the rules. When the whistle blows, you hop to. When the sergeant barks a command, you run to obey. If you are called to place yourself in the line of fire, you do not hesitate.

And if something goes horribly wrong? It is your responsibility. Did you follow the rules? Every last one? Did they change while you were catching that round? Deep down, you know how this goes. You are on the bottom of the priority list. If someone is going to go down for any acts in violation of the rules it is going to be you. That’s a given. Unless you claw your way up the chain of command into a position of authority over another. Then guess who gets the short end of the stick? Pitted against each other like a cock fight. May the best man win. The culling of the herd.

You eat when told, bath when told, sleep when told, and give your life when told. Dissent is punishable by immediate banishment. Out in the cold you go, devoid of a base on which to stand. The ground ripped out from under you.

So you need a network of trust to keep from being chewed alive and spit out like last night’s chaw. And you march together to the beat of a silent, but deep bond of survival. Survival in a system that churns and burns toy soldiers all saluting in a row.

There is a thin line that keeps you balanced between what you’ve been told is real and what is real, commonly referred to as sanity. And you hold on for dear life because that is all you know how to do.

You survive while the world around you crashes into a state of chaos. You reach out desperately to grasp hold of anything that you can to stay afloat. And you find that the only thing remaining constant is truth.

When all is said and done; when all the control games have been played; when all those ‘in charge’ have been exposed for what they truly are and the only thing left is a wet spot where they once cowered in fear, what remains is the truth. The last man standing. Then another. And another. Until a bond is formed that cannot be broken. A bond that will dissolve the fetters of enslavement. A bond that will truly set us free is the only way out of the maze of confusion, doubt and tyranny of ignorance.

Four months later, leaders of 175 countries met at UN headquarters in New York, where they signed the accord reached in Paris. Secretary of State John Kerry participated and signed the agreement on behalf of the United States. Even though this agreement is actually a treaty that should be submitted to the U.S. Senate for ratification, the UN negotiators, knowing full well the political reality that the Senate as presently constituted would not ratify, maintain that it is “binding,” while not subject to Senate ratification. Therefore, President Obama will have to implement the Paris agreement via executive orders and EPA regulations.

The delegates at this UN meeting committed their countries to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by a minimum of approximately 25 percent from 2005 levels, and to accomplish such a goal by the year 2025. One profoundly important fact never addressed is that their targeted enemy, carbon dioxide, is correctly known to be the “gas of life.” Plants ingest carbon dioxide, and without this gaseous substance, plants would not even exist.

In the face of all the condemnations of carbon dioxide, there are numerous highly placed and credible individuals who openly claim that the real goal of this decades-long campaign has far less to do with environmentalism and much more to do with gaining control of mankind through a UN super government. For instance, while she was serving the UN as its designated climate chief, Costa Rica’s Christiana Figueres openly stated on February 3, 2015: “[W]e are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years….”

Prior to the dangerous nonsense coming from Ms. Figueres, world government promoters at the influential Club of Rome likewise condemned the capitalist system. As far back as 1991, the globalists in this club admitted that they were “searching for a new enemy that would unite us.” They decided that “the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.” As reported by The New American‘s Alex Newman, the Club of Rome’s 1991 report entitled The First Global Revolution concluded that the dangers facing us “are caused by human intervention…. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” Reducing the world’s population then became the goal of many.

A more explicit conclusion than the Club of Rome’s offering came from famed oceanographer Jacques Cousteau. His explicit claim of the need to depopulate the earth appeared in an interview [English edition] in the November 1991UNESCO Courier published in France. The seemingly kind and lovable Frenchman said:

The damage people cause to the planet is a function of demographics – it is equal to the degree of development. [The single country] America burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladeshes…. This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it.

Cousteau’s desire to “eliminate” most of humanity drew little notice from the unreliable world media, but it is a major goal of many who promote the global warming scare. Who opposes this dangerous cabal and its designs? One prominent voice seeking to set the record straight is 60-year veteran meteorologist and founder of TV’s Weather Channel John Coleman. Calling the claim that mankind is causing global warming “the greatest scam in history,” he pointed to the goals of Ms. Figueres and to the welcome conclusion reached by Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer, who rightly noted that the UN’s policy is “to redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.”

Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, remains a staunch opponent of these environmental claims. He will stand in the way of moves to have the Senate approve the Paris accord. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) labeled the pact “unattainable” and will also oppose its approval. Calls to their offices to thank them are certainly in order.

As the end of the Obama era looms, the soon-to-be ex-president will push hard to implement the Paris accord as part of his legacy. As mentioned above, since the Senate won’t ratify it as a treaty, he’ll seek to implement its provisions through executive orders and regulations. Congress has the to power to stop much or all of this. There is a need, therefore, for generating resistance.

Please call the offices of your two senators (202-224-3121) and your representative (202-225-3121) to help stave off this extremely dangerous drive by the Obama administration to use the UN’s Paris Climate Deal to control population, destroy jobs, and bring about world government under the United Nations.

Ultimately, the end goal of all who cherish freedom will require complete withdrawal from the United Nations.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

Ok Folks, write and or call your senators and representatives and see what good it does. They are corporate employee’s of the UNITES STATES CORPORATION, NOT YOUR LOYAL REPS. They do not work for you and don’t give a damn what you want!

Comments Off on Stop U.S. Implementation of the UN’s Paris Climate Deal

After writing a lengthy suicide note exposing terrifying plans the government has for American citizens, an agent with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) directorate walked onto a New York City pier on the Hudson River and used his service weapon to shoot himself in his head.

Several sources from the New York City Police Department reported to New York’s SuperStation95 FM, and to the Conservative Base that the contents of a lengthy and detailed suicide note found on the departed’s body described a frightening scenario of a federal government gone mad, according to Sgt. Neal McCaffrey.

“Apparently this was not an impromptu or impulsive act of suicide, but a plot that was hatched at least a week ago. The CBP agent, who was assigned to deportations of illegal aliens or legal aliens being kicked out of the U.S., was written in separate parts over at least seven days,” said McCaffrey who is assigned to city’s Human Services Police Division.

The note outlines why the officer chose to shoot himself: “The America I grew up in, and cherished, has been murdered by its own federal government. Our Constitution has become meaningless and our laws politicized so badly, they are no longer enforced except for political purposes” the note said. “Our elected officials are, to a person, utterly corrupt and completely devoid of any love or respect for the country which pays them. To them, everything is about getting and keeping power, and making illicit money from backroom deals.”

According to investigating homicide detectives, the 42-year-old U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement deportation officer — who hasn’t yet been identified — shot himself with his own .40 caliber semiautomatic service weapon while on Pier 40 in Hudson River Park at around 11 am (et) on Friday the 13th.

“There’s no indication that the May 13 date of the suicide had any significant meaning to the perpetrator/victim who worked at the Homeland Security Department’s offices in Manhattan,” said Police Officer Iris Aquino (NYPD-Ret.) who worked in Queens, New York.

The suicide victim was rushed to Manhattan’s Lenox Hill Hospital but doctors were never able to revive him. His superiors at ICE released an official statement Friday afternoon: “Tragically, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportation officer from the New York field office suffered a self-inflicted gunshot wound and has passed away. The agency is not releasing further details pending notification of the officer’s next of kin.”

According to the suicide note, the officer said:“I was hired to enforce the law; to capture and deport people who come to this country against our laws. But now, if I dare to do that, I face being suspended or fired because our President refuses to faithfully execute the duties of his office. Instead, I come to work each day, and collect a paycheck twice a month, for intentionally doing little to nothing. I cannot and will not be a party to this fraud; to this usurpation of the law, or to the despicable politicians betraying our nation.”

ICE is conducting an internal investigation of the matter but the New York Police Department is in charge of the suicide shooting investigation.

Agent Mentions FEMA Camps for Americans

In the suicide note, the federal agent described horrifying plans the upper-echelon federal officials have been formulating:

“If the American people knew what this government is planning, they would rise-up and overthrow it. If I or anyone else in the federal government revealed what is coming, we would be killed anyway, so now I will reveal what I know.

“We in federal law enforcement have been drilling for several years to control riots and uprisings from a coming financial collapse and widespread bank failures. The drills involve life-sized images of American men, even women and children, whom we are told to shoot for “practice” and to “get used to it.”

“We have been told that the economy is terminally ill and will fail in 2016. We are also told the banks are all insolvent and the FDIC doesn’t have nearly enough funds to bail out depositors. We are told these events are unavoidable and it is imperative that the government survive when people rise-up over this.

“When the collapse takes place, detention camps created under the FEMA REX-84 program in the 1980’s to house illegal aliens whom we were going to deport, will instead be used to imprison American Citizens whom the government feels constitute a “threat.” American citizens will be rounded-up without warrants and imprisoned without trial for God knows how long.

“These camps have been equipped to carry out Hitler-scale killings! An actual “purge” of Americans citizens by the very government which they, themselves, created and pay for! I cannot be party to this.”

The bizarre suicide note also describes how the plan calls for state-level national guard soldiers to be disarmed by the feds and over 1-billion rounds of ammunition purchased by the feds, and the Military over-deployed and being shrunk:

“The government knows the military will rise-up to stop this, so our military is being deployed overseas, intentionally involved in foreign wars, and deliberately shrunk in size so they cannot be here or help Americans! This is why certain ammunition and weaponry has been removed from state-level National Guard Armories and over a Billion rounds of hollow point ammunition has been bought by the federal government. The states themselves have been disarmed of military-grade firepower so they cannot defend themselves from the federal activities. This is also why local police departments have been militarized and provided with armored vehicles and weapons of war.

“When the inevitable collapse begins to take place, electric power to the entire country will be shut off, as will all forms of communication. All banks will be immediately closed; no one will be able to get any money because all ATM’s will be offline. Credit, Debit and EBT cards will not function. Anyone without cash will have no way to get any. The Emergency Alert System will be used to takeover all broadcast stations and tell the public this is a result of a cyber attack.

“But while the American people patiently await things to get back to normal, the government will unleash round-ups of citizens they deem militants or dangerous. With all civilian communications out, and all TV and radio stations taken over by the Emergency Alert System, by the time word spreads of what is taking place, the government will already have the upper hand.”

Federal prisoners to be gassed

“Every federal prison has been outfitted with lethal gas systems. When things go bad, all prisoners in all prisons will be placed in their cells on lock-down. Prison staff will depart the facility, and a certain designated person will trigger a lethal gas system. All federal prisoners, regardless of their crime or their sentence, will be gassed to death in their cells. Once the gas clears, the dead will be removed and the prisons will then be used to house citizens who fight against the federal onslaught.”

“So intent is the government to succeed they have recruited priests, rabbis and clerics from various religions to quote Scripture about “obeying government.” They are being trained to tell people not to fight back and that their best hope is to pray.”

This 10-page document is a blueprint for a federal takeover of the economy. Specifically, Obama’s plan involves seizing control of:

“All commodities and products that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals”• “All forms of energy”• “All forms of civil transportation”• “All usable water from all sources”• “Health resources – drugs, biological products, medical devices, materials, facilities, health supplies, services and equipment”• “Forced labor ( or “induction” as the executive order delicately refers to military conscription)

SuperStation95 took a look at this Executive Order from the Government Printing Office (GPO) web site and, sure enough, everything contained in the Officer’s suicide note about this Executive Order is true. Executive order 13603 says with ominous ambiguity: during “the full spectrum of emergencies.”

“If the dead Officer’s claims about an unavoidable economic and banking collapse are true, would it then follow that the Executive Order put in place by Obama, might be activated? Would all of us find ourselves in forced labor, while the government takes OUR food and re-distributes it under the Executive Order’s paragraph about “allocating resources?” This is terrifying stuff!

“There is much more to the suicide note and SuperStation95 is considering how much more to publish. As such, this is a developing story and readers should check back for further updates,” according to the radio station’s newsroom.

I was going to publish an apology for yesterdays rant, but now I will once again warn every reader that your false confidence in the government will get you murdered, one way or another the Banking Cartel that owns us is going to dismantle governments world wide and establish a world Authority that controls all Nations and it appears that America will be the first so as to destabilize the rest of humanity and their local governments. You can deny all this till hell freezes over but the evidence is explicit and available to all who will look and learn. We all have been beguiled from the get go and I know it is a miserable experience to love your country and kill innocent people for it only to discover we have been lied to from birth. These incredibly evil Bankers have been working non stop for this for over a hundred years and it is time for every American to wake up and get prepared. The police will show no mercy because they believe they will be protected as long as they are loyal & obedient. After all they have families and want them to survive. Most of you have no earthly idea how merciless warriors can be.

Comments Off on I. C. E. AGENT’S SUICIDE NOTE: GOVT. TO DISARM THE POPULATION, AND HEARD AMERICAN’S INTO CAMPS

As things are right now in America, there is nothing dumber than a person who will absolutely refuse to read anything that will remotely upset them. They do not want to have their emotional opinion of America debased, or have a reason to stop worshiping their scumbag politicians. They are still in the second grade intellectually when it comes to loyalty to the flag, and the ILLEGAL GOVERNMENT. They still believe God will right all wrongs, and ignore what the Holy Scriptures say. Most Christians believe it is a lack of faith to protect their own family and self from the government. It is an insult to God!

Well let me tell you squirrel brain idiots something, you are going to revert to an animal when you and your children are starving and you have no weapons to protect your wife and children from being raped, sodomized, and tortured before your eyes. Everything you possessed is now gone and your biggest concern is your money went first; followed by no electricity, gasoline, heat and air conditioning, food, ammo, and guns, all gone in a matter of a few days.

People you formerly loved will beat you to death for a piece of bread. And you are too stupid to believe it’s possible, in spite of the provable history of nations, war, murders, and loss of property. You will crawl on your belly and beg for mercy when there is none. You will watch your family be roasted and eaten by the lowest animals on two legs, and they will be laughing at your cowardice.

WAKE THE FUCK UP ASSHOLES

Your dream world just puked on everything you worshipped, and now there is no choice but to fight back until your legs are cut off and your bowls are spraying you with putrid excrement. Your last thought will probably be a vision of some young solider risking his life to drag your miserable ass to safety! That’s how stupid it is to ignore what is and will be, just because you are too chickenshit to learn and prepare. You just can’t stand for the lie to be proven; your government was the pukes that installed the Banking Cartels plan for a world government under their control. And you are expendable. Don’t think they will be merciful and keep you around to wipe their royal asses. Learn or burn!

Empty coal gondolas in a rail yard in Danville, W.Va. Patrick Morrisey, West Virginia’s attorney general, said President Obama’s climate change regulations would have “devastating impacts” on families in his state. Credit Luke Sharrett for The New York Times

By CORAL DAVENPORTOCT

WASHINGTON — As many as 25 states will join some of the nation’s most influential business groups in legal action to block President Obama’s climate change regulations when they are formally published Friday, trying to stop his signature environmental policy.

In August, the president announced in a White House ceremony that the Environmental Protection Agency rules had been completed, but they had not yet been published in the government’s Federal Register. Within hours of the rules’ official publication on Friday, a legal battle will begin, pitting the states against the federal government. It is widely expected to end up before the Supreme Court.

“I predict there will be a very long line of people at the federal courthouse tomorrow morning, eagerly waiting to file their suits on this case,” said Jeffrey R. Holmstead, a lawyer for the firm Bracewell & Giuliani who represents several companies that are expected to file such suits.

While the legal brawls could drag on for years, many states and companies, including those that are suing the administration, have also started drafting plans to comply with the rules. That strategy reflects the uncertainty of the ultimate legal outcome — and also means that many states could be well on the way to implementing Mr. Obama’s climate plan by the time the case reaches the Supreme Court.

The E.P.A.’s climate change rules are at the heart of Mr. Obama’s ambitious agenda to counter global warming by cutting emissions of planet-warming carbon pollution. If they withstand the legal challenges, the rules could shutter hundreds of polluting, coal-fired power plants and freeze construction of such plants in the future, while leading to a transformation of the nation’s power sector from reliance on fossil fuels to wind, solar and nuclear power.

Mr. Obama has also used the rules as leverage in his negotiations to reach a global climate change accord in Paris in December. He hopes to broker a deal committing every country to enacting domestic climate change policies.

The official publication of the rules will also spur legislative pushback on Capitol Hill, where Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, will introduce two resolutions to block them. The legislation will be introduced under the rarely used Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to block an executive branch rule within 60 legislative days of its publication.

While the resolutions are likely to pass the Republican-controlled Congress, Mr. Obama would be expected to veto them. But by introducing the resolutions, Mr. McConnell hopes to convey to the world that Congress does not support the Obama regulations — a message that could be amplified if the Senate votes on the resolutions before or during the Paris summit meeting.

The Obama administration has sought to ensure that the rules will not come under question before that meeting. By delaying the official publication of the rules until nearly three months after they were announced, for example, the administration appeared to be trying to ensure that no major legal decisions to weaken them would be issued before the Paris meeting.

A broad and powerful coalition of governors, attorneys general, coal companies, electric utilities and business groups such as the United States Chamber of Commerce will file suits contending that the rules, put forth under the 1970 Clean Air Act, represent an illegal interpretation of the law. They will also petition to delay implementation of the rule until the case is argued in federal court.

“The president’s illegal rule will have devastating impacts on West Virginia families, and families across the country,” Attorney General Patrick Morrisey of West Virginia said in a statement. Mr. Morrisey, whose home state’s economy is heavily dependent on coal mining, is expected to play a lead role in the multistate lawsuit.

States and companies may be hedging their bets.

In Georgia, Gov. Nathan Deal’s administration plans to sue the E.P.A. At the same time, the governor, a Republican, has also instructed his director of environmental protection, Judson H. Turner, to begin crafting a plan to comply with the rules.

“The governor of Georgia said to me, ‘Whatever action may be taken on the legal front, we’ll need to develop a plan that works for Georgia,’ ” Mr. Turner said. If Mr. Obama’s plan survives the legal challenge, Mr. Turner added, “we’ll have the confidence that we’ll put a plan for Georgia together that’s better than a federal plan.”

Similar dynamics are playing out in many other states that are suing over the rules, said Vicki Arroyo, the executive director of the Georgetown University Climate Center, which focuses on state-level climate policies.

“It’s really rare to find a state that just says, ‘Hell no,’ ” she said.

The rules assign each state a target for reducing its carbon pollution from power plants, but allows states to create their own custom plans for doing so. That rule is designed to encourage states to make major changes in their electric power sectors — for example, to shut down coal-fired power plants and replace them with wind and solar power. It is also designed to encourage states to enact so-called cap-and-trade systems, under which they would place a cap on carbon emissions and create a market for buying and selling pollution credits.

States have to submit an initial version of their plans by 2016 and final versions by 2018. States that refuse to submit a plan will be forced to comply with one developed by the federal government.

Republican governors have denounced the rule, particularly its emphasis on pushing cap-and-trade systems; in his first term, Mr. Obama tried but failed to send a cap-and-trade bill through Congress. Since then, the term has become politically toxic: Republicans have attacked the idea as “cap-and-tax.” The governors of five states — Texas, Indiana, Wisconsin, Louisiana and Oklahoma — have threatened to refuse to submit a plan of any kind.

But economists and many industry leaders have found that in many cases, the easiest and cheapest way for states to comply would be by adopting cap-and-trade systems.

American Electric Power, an electric utility that operates in 11 states, is among the companies that intends to sue the administration over the rule. At the same time, the company’s vice president, John McManus, said: “We think it makes sense for states to at least start developing a plan. The alternative of having a federal plan has risks.” And he said that his company could support a cap-and-trade plan. “The initial read is that a market-based approach is more workable,” he said.

Comments Off on Numerous States Prepare Lawsuits Against Obama’s Climate Policy

OLDDOGS COMMENTS: Please forgive my tardy posting as I am recovering from my Dear Wife’s “HONEY DO” project yesterday. It involved working on my knees all day to re-caulk the fish pond waterfall I built in 2004 while recovering from Rotator cuff and bone spurs surgery.

Please understand that I am not a “tub-thumper”, an enthusiast, or an apologist for Donald Trump. But his electrifying emergence on the scene represents a sea-change in American politics far more consequential than his own pyrotechnic personality, bold campaign-style, and receipt of popular acclaim suggest. He is, as it were, the surfer who—perhaps by accident, perhaps by insight, but in any event in a timely fashion—has caught the first of the really big waves rolling towards shore. The significant aspect of the present situation is not the surfer, however, but the wave: namely, the upsurge of popular disgust for the “two”-party political vessel in which this country is sailing on a collision-course into the rocks of despair. This first big wave threatens all of the ships riding at anchor in the Establishment’s harbor. So the Establishment needs to throw up a breakwater, in a manner both fast and furious.

As anyone with 20-20 political vision can see, America’s domestic enemies have taken off their velvet gloves to reveal the iron fists underneath, by employing against Trump directly, and America ultimately, the modern Bolshevistic strategy of socio-political destabilization through so-called “non-violent direct action”, “weathermen” tactics, and “color revolutions”—all in line with the old Leninist/Stalinist slogan, “there are no fortresses which Bolsheviks cannot storm”. Please refrain from chiding me that the contemporary Establishment is not, to one degree or another, made up largely of Bolsheviks. The opposite is obviously true. Some are retreaded Trotskyites (who call themselves “neoconservatives”). Others are watered-down Mensheviks (who call themselves “social democrats” or “moderate socialists”).

Others are the equivalent of NEP-men (better known here as “corporate socialists”, because they rely on governmental intervention in the economy to guarantee profits for themselves, while offloading losses onto the backs of the general public). And all of them are doctrinaire Leninists, inasmuch as they subscribe to his notion that “[t]he scientific term ‘dictatorship’ means nothing more nor less than authority untrammeled by any laws, absolutely unrestricted by any rules whatever, and based directly on force”. Vladimir I. Lenin, “A Contribution to the History of the Question of the Dictatorship, A Note” [1920], in Collected Works (Moscow, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: Progress Publishers, 4th English Edition, 1966), Volume 31, at 353. None of these people gives a tinker’s dam for the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution—indeed, they believe themselves to be “untrammeled by any laws”. And all of them enthusiastically promote the present-day global “war on terrorism”, under color of which a para-militarized police-state apparatus, “absolutely unrestricted by any rules whatever, and based directly on force”, is being built up within this country in order to wage a domestic “war of terrorism” against the American people. See my book By Tyranny Out of Necessity: The Bastardy of “Martial Law” for the particulars on this.

If I may base my appreciation of the present situation upon an historical parallel drawn from Germany’s dolorous experience under the Weimar government in the 1920s and 1930s (which is probably familiar to most readers of this commentary), the advent of these bare-knuckled mass assaults on this country amounts to our own home-grown Bolsheviks’ declaration of ein Kampf um die Macht auf Leben und Tod (a struggle for power to the death). They will employ their Rotfrontkämpferbund (Red Front fighters’ league) to try to derail Trump’s nomination, through die Herrschaft des Pöbels auf der Straße (mobocracy in the street). If he is nominated, they will use der Bund to try to deny him election. If he is elected notwithstanding all of their efforts before November, they will then turn der Bund loose to stifle any major reforms which he attempts to put through after his inauguration, whether with or especially without Congress, the Judiciary, and the bureaucracy behind him. And please spare me the innuendo that, by drawing upon this parallel, I am somehow suggesting that Trump is a modern American “Hitler” figure. Rather, my intuition tells me that Trump is the sort of individual, perhaps rough-hewn but basically honest, who might have saved Germany from Hitlerism, as well as from Bolshevism, had the good Germans who came forward in der Wiederstand (the resistance-movement) after 1933 been more prescient and better organized before then.

One may ask why America’s Bolsheviks have decided to come out of the closet to exhibit their true coloration by unleashing mobocracy in the street, when they can (and surely will) employ every kind of old-fashioned fraud familiar in American politics to steal the election. The answer is that they anticipate their inability to put into practice Stalin’s apperçu that who votes is less important than who counts the votes, and are prudently preparing for the worst possible eventuality—namely, that in these unsettled times even widespread electoral fraud may not deprive Trump of victory if the polling-places are inundated by a true “revolt of the masses”. Moreover, even the most effective techniques of electoral fraud will be useless after the election. No further elections of consequence will be held during the first two years in which Trump holds “the Office of President”. If he cannot be stifled during that period, perhaps “the Trump phenomenon” will prove its worth in successful Presidential actions, and then will demonstrate its longevity and strength in the next elections—with the Bolsheviks suffering defeat after defeat. Between elections, the Bolsheviks will not be able to rely exclusively upon their co-conspirators, fellow travelers, dupes, useful idiots, and assorted fools in Congress, the Judiciary, and the bureaucracy to stand up to Trump. For the righteous anger of legions of patriotic Americans lined up behind him will give all of them pause. To put iron in their cronies’ backbones, the Bolsheviks will need to provide them with muscle in the streets: namely, hordes of well-funded, well-drilled “protesters” and “dissenters” deployed to shout down, or violently shut down, every popular manifestation of support for Trump.

So, as President, Trump—and all of the patriotic Americans in his camp—will desperately need the Militia:

(i) to awaken, energize, authorize, mobilize, organize, equip, train, and deploy on his behalf those whom the Declaration of Independence styles “the good People”; (ii) to protect Trump himself—because no part of the present governmental apparatus at any level of the federal system can be trusted to do so; (iii) to put through fundamental reforms that can be accomplished by the President alone (“to execute the Laws of the Union”, including both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, perforce of Article I, § 8, cl. 15 and such statutes as 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f); 10 U.S.C. §§ 332 and 333; and 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242), in particular against entrenched, recalcitrant, hostile, and disloyal bureaucrats and subversive private factions and other NGOs and special-interest groups; and especially (iv) to leave puissant governmental institutions for “the good People” to use on their own at the State and Local levels in the event of an unavoidable and utterly destabilizing national crisis, probably centered in banking and haute finance, which breaks out during his Presidency.

With respect to points (ii) and (iii) in particular, one might recall the wisdom of General William Tecumseh Sherman who, when importuned to make himself a candidate for the White House, replied that “I would account myself a fool, a madman, an ass, to embark anew, at sixty-five years of age, in a career that may, at any moment, become tempest-tossed by the perfidy, the defalcation, the dishonesty or neglect of any of a hundred thousand subordinates utterly unknown to the President of the United States.” Quoted in Burke Davis, Sherman’s March (New York, New York: Vantage Books, 1988), at 298. So, if Trump intends to embark upon such a dangerous “career”, he must confront the risk of disloyal “subordinates utterly unknown to the President”, in terms of their identities, their subversive agenda, and their actual misdeeds. This problem can be solved only through mobilization of the Militia—for example, through the “execution of [certain of] the Laws of the Union” (say, 10 U.S.C. §§ 332 and 333 coupled with 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001, 1505, 1512, 1513, 1515, and 2071) for the purpose of airing all of the dirty linen which the bureaucracy has been hiding, from the extent of the CIA’s infiltration of and covert influence over other civilian governmental agencies, the Armed Forces, and private concerns, to the truth concerning the assassinations of JFK, the Waco massacre, the events surrounding 9/11, the origin and promotion of ISIS (and allied “radical Moslem” organizations), and so on and on and on.

Inasmuch as der Rotfrontkämpferbund is now being brazenly deployed, a counterrevolutionary “white” force must be mobilized to oppose and defeat it. If loyal Americans want to avoid witnessing the rise of some extreme “right-wing” (actually, “right-socialistic”) “brown” force such as die Sturmabteilung (by default the main counterweight to the Communist street-gangs in Weimar Germany during her time of troubles)—which many desperate Americans will demand, and not a few will surely join, if they are offered no other powerful alternative—something else must be provided for them. This force must be raised from among “the good People”, there being no other source with the necessary loyalty, legal authority, self-interest, and sheer numbers requisite for the task at hand. Especially, it must be a force with explicit and unequivocal authority under the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, an establishment within the government, not a force the provenance of which can be traced only to some private political party, movement, or group.

Therefore, if Trump actually intends to be a constitutional “Commander in Chief” in the fullest sense in both law and fact—and, Heaven knows, if he does not intend as much then he should emulate General Sherman by not seeking “the Office of President” at all—he needs to promote the exercise of that high authority against America’s domestic enemies, through exhortation for and mobilization of what the Constitution itself declares to be uniquely “necessary to the security of a free State”, and to which it explicitly assigns the authority and responsibility “to execute the Laws of the Union”—and he must do this, in both words and deeds, immediately if not sooner. This is no time to play for time; for, as the old saying has it, time brings all things, bad as well as good. During his campaign, he must advocate revitalization of the Militia; and, after his election, he must take every action necessary and proper to that end. I suspect that, if he does grasp that nettle, he will be able to say of the contemporary Establishment what General Sherman said of the old Confederacy: “pierce the shell, and it’s all hollow inside”.

On the other hand, if—Heaven forfend!—Hillary Clinton should seize “the Office of President”, either by her own devices or (more likely) with the aid of anti-Trump back-stabbers in the Republican Party or some third-party “spoiler” candidate (from such as the Libertarian Party, which disastrously split the conservative vote in favor of a dyed-in-the-wool Clintonite in the last gubernatorial election in Virginia), she and the Bolsheviks behind her will not sit on their hands. Instead, emboldened by their triumph in scotching Trump, they will turn out der Rotfrontkämpferbund to advance their revolutionary agenda by deploying das Faustrecht (mob rule by the fist) against all of the “constitutionalist”, “patriotic”, “conservative”, “traditionalist”, and other politically, economically, and culturally “right-wing” groups in the country: First, to intimidate them and anyone who even tangentially supports them. Second, to turn the undecided citizenry against them when they try to defend themselves (denouncing even their verbal self-defense as “incitement to violence”). And third, to unleash para-militarized police-state oppression, some species of “martial law” jury-rigged under color of “emergency powers”, Vyshinsky-type prosecutors, and the kangaroo courts to suppress whichever Americans try to stand up for their natural and constitutional rights. This, the Bolsheviks will expect, will bring about die Endlösung (the final solution) of the problems of popular sovereignty and popular self-government which so vex all totalitarians.

The even more ominous problem is that, one way or another, during a Hillary Clinton Presidency America will surely be subjected to Bolshevism running amok. In the event, say, of a sudden catastrophic collapse of the monetary and banking systems—leading to hyperinflation, a depression, or (most likely) the one followed by the other—Hillary will not allow herself to become a latter-day Herbert Hoover. Instead, she will strike out wildly at everyone whom she will perceive as an “enemy”. Her incompetence being exceeded only by her arrogance, ambition, avarice, and appetite for the exercise of abusive authority, she will immediately invoke “emergency powers”, and especially some version of “martial law”. The entire world is already aware of her homicidal extremism, in the epitaph for Gaddafi which she cackled after the Libyan affair: “We came, we saw, he died!” Undoubtedly, she will display that same barbaric attitude here—unless WE THE PEOPLE will be ready, willing, and able to invoke Nancy Reagan’s dictum: “Just say no!” The effectiveness of most laws requires that most of the citizenry are willing to obey them without demur. If the run of common Americans will come to realize that “emergency powers” are bunkum, that “martial law” is bunkum to the second power, and that no one but THE PEOPLE themselves can maintain “the security of a free State”, in the manner which the Constitution mandates, Hillary will find herself a tin-pot dictatrix without the ability to dictate, because she will be without subjects willing to acquiesce in her dictation. When that time comes, however, THE PEOPLE will have to know what their rights, duties and powers are—and what her powers (the powers of any President, for that matter) are not. Between now and then, they will have a lot to learn, and not much time in which to learn it.

Be forewarned. One need not be a dabbler in the occult to foretell the future in this respect. Neither need one be much of a student of modern history to fear the accuracy in these times of the old adages that “no one learns anything from history other than that no one ever learns anything from history”, and that “we grow too soon old and too late smart”. (Personally, too, I appreciate the wisdom of the observation that “no man is ever taken for a prophet in his own country”. For I have long been struggling to educate Americans about the Militia—and, most recently, about the utter illegality of “martial law”—with about as much success as if I had been trying to sell a twelve-step program in humility and reticence to the Kardashians.)

Nonetheless, I believe that Mao Tse-tung was correct (albeit perhaps only accidentally or hypocritically so) when he wrote that “[t]he people, and the people alone, are the motive force in the making of world history”, that “[t]he masses have boundless creative power”, and that

[a]ll reactionaries are paper tigers. In appearance, the reactionaries are terrifying, but in reality they are not so powerful. From a long-term point of view, it is not the reactionaries but the people who are really powerful.

Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung (Peking, China: Foreign Languages Press, 1966), at 118, 118, and 72. Thus, to turn the Bolsheviks’ own slogan to the purpose of America’s salvation: “There are no fortresses which ‘the good People’ cannot storm.”

In the final analysis, it is critically important that Trump should turn to “the good People”, trust “the good People”, empower “the good People”, and rely upon “the good People”. Not only for his own sake (which in the great scheme of things amounts to little), but also for their sake first and foremost (which amounts to everything). As modern Presidential campaigns illustrate, this country is steeped in its own bastard version of das Führerprinzip (the leader principle). As early as 1933, America had her “Chief” (Roosevelt), just as Germany had her Führer (Hitler), Italy her Duce (Mussolini), and Russia her Vozhd’ (Stalin), to be followed not long afterwards by Red China with her “Great Helmsman” (Mao). Today, all too many Americans view a President as someone whose purpose is to advance the agenda of their political party or special-interest group, not someone who should act unselfishly with and through WE THE PEOPLE so that THE PEOPLE themselves can become permanently the masters of their own destiny. Such approval of, or at least acquiescence in, rule from “the top down” must in short order prove fatal to popular self-government.In principle, it denies the precept of the Declaration that “Governments * * * instituted among Men[ ] deriv[e] their just powers from the consent of the governed”—not from acceptance by “the governed” of “the leader’s” mere assertions of authority. In practice, it generates increasingly uncritical support for “the leader’s” program, then increasingly blind obedience to his dictates. Until society arrives at the terminal stage of suicidal political regimentation: Führer befehl, wir folgen (leader command, we follow).

Just as the strength of any pyramid resides at its base, not at its apex, so, too, with popular sovereignty—and with the Power of the Sword in WE THE PEOPLE’S hands for the purpose of “execut[ing] the Laws of the Union” through the Militia. In a constitutional republic, true authority and legitimate power never descend from “the top down”, but always arise—indeed, can be generated and exercised only—from “the bottom up”. Trump’s greatest achievement (were he capable of any truly great achievement) would be to put this truth into action. By one segment of the population he will be damned if he does; and, by another segment, damned if he does not; so he may as well be taken for a goat rather than a sheep. That goes for the rest of us, too.

We THE People who are the Civilian Authority with the superior lawfull standing over the U.S. Corporation=UNITED STATES CORPORATION and authority over the U.S. Military acting under the Original Jurisdiction of the United States Constitution 1789, Bill of Rights 1791 with the original 13th Amendment=”which removes persons who have accepted an entitlement from holding public office” as the United States of America, Republic form of Government, De Jure, standing as the true form of Government is proud to announce and notice the following effective IMMEDIATELY.

The purpose of this writing is to add the next pieces to the graphical explanation of the relationships between the US Corporation to Straw man and to Us – the living breathing men and women who occupy the geographical lands of the De Jure Constitutional Government for the United States of America.

We want to know that our boarders are watched and we are protected when we come and go either on pleasure or business. We want to make sure we have a roof over our head, good food not GMO to eat, and the people who represent us at State and Federal levels are looking out for us and not their personal pocket books.

So we want to disconnect ourselves from the US Corporation both personally, State and Federal wise. So the questions are many and what should we be aware of to disconnect.

On March 27, 1861, seven (7) southern states walked out of the Union along with several of the northern states under ”Sine Die” breaking the contract between the Federation and Union States. The states seceding from the Union were South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Texas.

This event caused the contract which consisted of the Articles of Confederation, the Organic Constitution of 1789 and the Bill of Rights of 1791 to be breached.

Upon breaking this contract, the following happened: The Union of States relationship was suspended and the United States of America was suspended in its existence.

Article I – Legislation was suspended; Under Parliament Congress, Congress ceased to exist as a lawful body and all lawful Republic governmental Seats were vacant*

Article II – Executive branch was suspended; Office of President was suspended – Office of the President was vacant* (President had no authority to declare war). At this point, the then sitting President had no power, no authority, his position as president was suspended and considered vacant by the De Jure Republic Constitutional Government.

On April 15, 1861, President Lincoln executed the first executive order written by any President, Executive Order 1, Executive Orders are not constitutional however it is perceived as law by the use of television propagating the deception. This is not correct; an Executive Order is the memo method of communicating between departments of a corporation and is not the law of the land.

When Congress eventually did reconvene, it was reconvened under the military authority of the Commander-in-Chief and not by Rules of Order for Parliamentary bodies or by Constitutional Law; placing the American people under martial rule ever since that national emergency declared by President Lincoln.

The Constitution for the United States of America temporarily ceased to be the law of the land, and the President, Congress, and the Courts unlawfully presumed that they were free to remake the national government in their own fashion, whereas, lawfully, no constitutional provisions were in place which afforded power or authority to enact any of the actions which were taken which presumed to place the nation under the new form of federal government control.

On April 17, 1861 and over the next five (5) weeks – seceding from the Union were the additional states of Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas totaling eleven (11) confederate states.

In 1862, the unlawful congress redefined the word Person as a legal term of art, creating a fictional entity, fictional characterization, Straw man, corporate entity. Definition: Person = Fictional Characterization which allowed the unlawful congress to say “that you can create, you can control”.

In 1864, the unlawfull congress redefining the word STATE to be District of Columbia. They are setting a pattern for “that you can create, you can control”. In Webster’s dictionary 1828, the definition for Columbia as a noun is America; the United States; a poetical appellation given in honor of Columbus, the discoverer.

Furthermore, the definition used today in US Corporation speeches, law, statutes, Court System for Person = Fictional Characterization and STATE= District of Columbia are hereby repealed, revoked and terminated because these words were redefined by an Unconstitutional congress to be used to entrap the living, breathing flesh and blood man or woman into debt slavery by the 14th amendment. This is spoken by the We THE People of the De Jure Constitutional Government for the United States of America.

The definition for Person and for State as per Webster dictionary 1828:

PERSON, noun per’sn. [Latin persona; said to be compounded of per, through or by, and sonus, sound; a Latin word signifying primarily a mask used by actors on the state.] 1. An individual human being consisting of body and soul. We apply the word to living beings only, possessed of a rational nature; the body when dead is not called a person, It is applied alike to a man, woman or child. A person is a thinking intelligent being: verb transitive, To represent as a person; to make to resemble; to image. [Not in use.]

STATE, noun [Latin, to stand, to be fixed.] 1. Condition; the circumstances of a being or thing at any given time. These circumstances may be internal, constitutional or peculiar to the being, or they may have relation to other beings. We say, the body is in a sound state or it is in a weak state; or it has just recovered from a feeble state, The state of his health is good. The state of his mind is favorable for study. So we say, the state of public affairs calls for the exercise of talents and wisdom. In regard to foreign nations, our affairs are in a good state, So we say, single state and married state. Declare the past and present state of things.

STATE, verb transitive, 1. To set; to settle. [See Stated.] 2. To express the particulars of any thing verbally; to represent fully in words; to narrate; to recite. The witnesses stated all the circumstances of the transaction. They are enjoined to state all the particulars. It is the business of the advocate to state the whole case. Let the question be fairly stated.

As we continue with the for mentioned timeline, The US Corporation continues to attack the vacant seats of the De Jure Constitutional Government, its people and the lands by writing Executive Orders, Acts and Treaties created by the US Corporation that starts with the “Act of 1871.”, Creating the District of Columbia and defining it as a state while the Union States are redefined as territories under the District of Columbia, the “Pan American treaty of 12-26-1933 (49STAT3097) Treaty Series 881”, and the “International Organization Immunities Act of 12-9-1945,” since all of these ACT’s and Treaty references were created by an Unconstitutional government. We THE People are not obligated nor bound by these unconstitutional instruments.

That the Pan American treaty of 12-26-1933 (49 STAT 3097) Treaty Series 881 – (Convention on Rights and Duties of States) stated CONGRESS replaced STATUTES with international law, placing all states under international law.

That the International Organization Immunities Act of 12-9-1945 – – Congress relinquished every public office over to the UN. Local governments up to the president fall under UN jurisdiction. Congress gave the UN the right to dictate what laws will be international & gave them the right to tax the States.

That the International Reorganization Rescind Act- Congress put this into form but they never took action to rescind the act. Fairly recently an Ohio judge filed suit claiming that Congress did not have the right to relinquish government authority over to the UN (a corporation or foreign country) and that the Congressional act was a constitutional violation because they didn’t put it to the States or the people to agree on it. In 2005 the US Supreme court declined to hear the case therefore all public offices are under UN jurisdiction & they are not American Citizens.

Furthermore, the action by the US Corporation has been Fraudulent in representation of the people of the United States of America as well as taking advantage of minors. The individuals who represent this corporation are not We THE Peoples’ government and these individuals are by lawful governing considered to be Corporate CONTRACTORS =ACTORS who do not represent the Political Will of the People. We THE People do hereby declare the US Corporation governs NOTHING since they are nothing more than an unlawful criminal organization. The US Corporation is physically bound to White House = CEO office and Capital Building = Board of Directors office on the land they call District of Columbia. They have NO authority over the people or lands of the United States of America or the District of Columbia.

Furthermore, all adhesion contracts are suspended and revoked due to the fraudulent actions by US Corporation and Banking industry against the living breathing flesh and blood men and women of the United States of America.

Other – the autograph line on personal checks is micro-printed by Banking Industry further binding parties to debt; mortgages with no jurisdictional representation and much more.

Furthermore, the Bretton Woods Agreement Act with the association of the US Corporation with the CROWN = Rothschild Banking Cartel, the International Monetary Fund are foreign entities and Unconstitutional and are suspended and revoked by We THE People of the De Jure Constitutional Government for the United States of America.

AN ACT To provide for the participation of the United States in the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SEC. 2, 22 U.S.C. 286, The President is hereby authorized to accept membership for the United States in the International Monetary Fund (herein after referred to as the ‘‘Fund’’), and in the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Bank’’), provided for the Articles of Agreement of the Fund and the Articles of Agreement of the Bank as set forth in the Final Act of the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference dated July 22, 1944, and deposited in the archives of the Department of State.

APPOINTMENT OF GOVERNORS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS, AND ALTERNATES

SEC. 3.1, 22 U.S.C. 286a, (a) The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint a governor of the Fund who shall also serve as governor of the Bank, and an executive director of the Fund and an executive director of the Bank. The executive directors so appointed shall also serve provisional executive directors of the Fund and the Bank for the purposes of the respective Articles of Agreement. The term of office for the governor of the Fund and of the Bank shall be five years. The term of office for the executive directors shall be two years, but the executive directors shall remain in office until their successors have been appointed. (b) The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint an alternate for the governor of the fund and an alternate for the governor of the Bank. 2 The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint an alternate for F:COMPIFIBRETTON. December 23, 2011.

Furthermore, the United Nations has been given direct orders to stand down and to leave the Republic State of New York and the entire geographical lands known as United States of America. No department of our government shall report to a foreign agency or foreign agent. United Nations failure to comply shows their intent to continue to carry forward the criminal Agenda 21 of mass murder of people in the United States of American and the World. It is the duty and obligation of the Military to remove these criminal power seekers from our lands.

We THE People now understand that we have been fooled, manipulated and coerced by fraudulent acts committed by Abraham Lincoln and the US Corporation through their adhesion contracts for their financial gains.

Furthermore, The POPE on July 11 and effective September 1, 2013 issued a APOSTOLIC LETTER ISSUED MOTU PROPRIO OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF FRANCIS ON THE JURISDICTION OF THE JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES OF VATICAN CITY STATE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS.

Pope Francis Apostolic Letter effectively stripped away the immunity of all judges, attorneys, government officials and all entities established under the Roman Curia. Since “All” corporations are established under the Roman Curia they have their immunity stripped away including their C level, Executive level, Office of General Council, and significant operational staff.

All of these “persons” can be held accountable for war crimes, crimes against humanity, for the unlawful restrictions of the liberties of the divine spirit incarnate; for failure to settle the accounts; for continued prosecution of claims already settled, etc. Definition: Divine Spirit is humanity.

Over the past several years, there has been a great and powerful movement by the patriots and others to take back our Unalienable rights, pronouns as UN-A-LIEN-ABLE or said Not-a-lien-able right. This means no one can take these from us as per the bible and our fore fathers. To stand up the republic once again and dissolve the US Corporation and rid ourselves of the banking cartels who direct the central banking wars for their profit.

On October 21st, 2012, a group of living breathing men and woman meet with a specific intent to reseat our Federal government. They did reseat our United States of America as a sovereign Nation once again. Along with that comes the re-instatement of the contract between Federal and Union States or Nation States. We THE People stand once again under the De Jure Constitutional Government, Republic form of Government which represents the People of this great land known as United States of America. The offices that have sat vacant since March 27 1861 are now being filled with men and woman from this nation.

By the Political Will of We THE People we hereby claim the following:

Revocation of all the unconstitutional acts, treaties, proclamations, etc. since March 27 1861,

The law of the land is Geneva & King James Bible, Common Law, Articles of Confederation, the Organic Constitution of 1789, the Bill of Rights of 1791 and Northwest Ordinance. These laws apply to all 50 Nation States.

US Corporation is Confined to the geographical area called the District of Columbia, The US Corporation is physically bound to White House = CEO office and Capital Building = Board of Directors office.

The US Corporation has NO authority over the people or lands of the United States of America and the people or land of the District of Columbia.

Revocation of all adhesion contracts by US Corporation due to their fraudulent actions against the people.

The IRS and Federal Reverse are associated with US Corporation and IMF which have no authority to operate on the lands of the United States of America.

The De Jure Constitutional Government declares Martial law over the US Corporation and the land known as Washington DC. Washington DC will be patrolled by the United States Military and Militias of the states assigned to do so.

We THE People will consider criminal charges against all the actors, agents and their supporting staff as far back as necessary …

It is the Political Will of We THE People~

Notice to Agent is notice to Principal

Notice to Principal is notice to Agent

Comments Off on We THE People Present this Open Letter & Public Notice

The Consequences of Narcissism in an Age of Collectivism and Dumbing Down

By Cynthia

Studies have shown that the rise of social media, in particular Facebook, has fostered a culture of narcissism in a society where self-obsession was already clearly on the upswing. It is a self obsession of one’s status in “the group” and a voyeur’s addiction for snooping into the intimate details of everyone else’s life. In this self-obsession there is no deep introspection or reflection on life, rather, all the world is a stage. In fact, a study performed by the University of Virginia published in Science in July 2014 found that 67% of male subjects and 25% of females asked to sit alone with their own thoughts for 6 to 15 minutes self-administered mildly painful electrical shocks rather than engage in quiet thinking on interesting or pleasant topics. One man shocked himself 190 times in 15 minutes with half of the participants reporting the brief time alone to reflect was unpleasant and boring.

These days, just about every person appears to be in a mad dash to get their next dopamine spike, that brain pleasure “fix” experienced in response to food, sex, shopping, drugs, or simply encountering something new and unusual. There is a preoccupation with self-gratification, and yet, the collectivist or hive mindset is built into the equation with indoctrination starting at a tender age. We are hard-wired to conform to the group or tribe for basic survival. The powers that shouldn’t be have taken full advantage of this hard wiring and reconfigured the impulse into a compulsion to conform to the warped culture they have been molding for centuries. It is a culture that obsesses on triviality, celebrities, materialism, and being a social member in good standing. Within this framework, we get our collectivist fixes.

Yesterday, my local newspaper, which serves a large metropolis, printed a story on its front page about a new growing trend of young women in college using an online service to solicit “gifts” and allowances from older men referred to as “sugar daddies”. The article pointed out more than once that the practice was not “illegal” despite being a clear front for an alternative form of prostitution and it profiled the example of one successful sugar baby named Vanessa who has three regular sugar daddies and has gone on many “dates” with men. In a backhand fashion, the story attempted to rationalize the practice as an alternative to racking up student loan debt. The number of participants in this new form of prostitution is growing by leaps and bounds. What does that say about the moral decay of our society? More importantly, the fact that this revolting practice is a front page article on a main stream media outlet tells us that the public is being methodically brainwashed into accepting a level of social and moral decay and dysfunction that would have seemed unimaginable only a generation or two ago. Anything goes as long as we all get our next self-gratification fix? Astounding! Is there nothing we will stand against as along as the pernicious effects are introduced slowly and methodically?

We are being herded into a cashless society such that ANY true dissent, no matter how meek the dissent and no matter how egregious or barbaric the abuse by our overlords, will become impossible because we know the vast majority of people could never withstand the prospect of their bank accounts being shut down, the utilities to their homes suspended, the privilege of travel revoked, friends and relatives held under suspicion, and the black mark of becoming a social outcast. That is how the global elite mafia will keep us on the shortest of leashes, any deviation from acceptable thinking swiftly punished – you will lose the last vestiges of your humanity to be replaced by electronic entertainment and a false sense of empowerment in an completely artificial world. Nothing will be known. If your child dies from cancer due to elite administered vaccinations or poisons sprayed in geoengineering projects you will be fed a stream of lies. There is no dignity in a such a life where all information is controlled in the hands of a few “technocrats” and their Rockefeller and Rothschild puppet masters.

The Establishment Climate Change narrative is fairy tale and it is the basis for the rise of the enslavement system being rolled out right now. Most of what we have been told about vaccinations is an outright lie, the history, safety, and efficacy has been a fiction foisted on legions of clinicians and researchers during their long education and training, including myself. The entire basis for the indignities of the TSA and Homeland Security is another lie which is the 9/11 false flag attack. To publicly take a stand against these atrocities is to risk loss of social standing and ostracism. A couple of years from now when the control grid has been completed, publicly taking a stand will risk fines, government profiling, incarceration, and overt targeting. Why have some die-hard statist loving Academics felt emboldened enough to publicly propose jail time and even executions for climate change deniers? The reason is the west, especially the US, represents the “last man standing”, the one nation that retained a significant percentage of human beings who have fully understood what has been at stake all of these years – our very humanity. Now is the time to stand on our feet again while we still can, once we are chained and lying on our backs there will be no dissent.

If this moves you in any way, please send this message to everyone you know and ask them to do the same.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

My readers are fortunate Cynthia wrote this article, because I would have butchered your eyes with crude insults, had I addressed the issue. There is no damn excuse for Americans to not be obsessed with our incarceration and loss of freedom to protect our life. Wake the hell up folks, all of your pleasures will disappear shortly, and we both know you will bend over and take it with a smile! Saying

As many have noted, Ferguson, Missouri, currently looks like a war zone. And its police—kitted out with Marine-issue camouflage and military-grade body armor, toting short-barreled assault rifles, and rolling around in armored vehicles—are indistinguishable from soldiers.

America has been quietly arming its police for battle since the early 1990s.

Faced with a bloated military and what it perceived as a worsening drug crisis, the 101st Congress in 1990 enacted the National Defense Authorization Act. Section 1208 of the NDAA allowed the Secretary of Defense to “transfer to Federal and State agencies personal property of the Department of Defense, including small arms and ammunition, that the Secretary determines is— (A) suitable for use by such agencies in counter-drug activities; and (B) excess to the needs of the Department of Defense.” It was called the 1208 Program. In 1996, Congress replaced Section 1208 with Section 1033.

The idea was that if the U.S. wanted its police to act like drug warriors, it should equip them like warriors, which it has—to the tune of around $4.3 billion in equipment, according to a report by the American Civil Liberties Union. The St. Louis County Police Department’s annual budget is around $160 million. By providing law enforcement agencies with surplus military equipment free of charge, the NDAA encourages police to employ military weapons and military tactics.

1033 procurements are not matters of public record. And the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which coordinates distribution of military surplus, refuses to reveal the names of agencies requesting “tactical” items, like assault rifles and MRAPs — for security reasons, a spokesperson for DLA told Newsweek via email. One can only trace “tactical” items as far the county of the requesting agency. In the case of Ferguson, that means St. Louis County.

St. Louis County law enforcement agencies have, through the 1033 Program, acquired the following “tactical” equipment, according to Mike O’Connell, Communications Director for the Missouri Department of Public Safety:

Despite the fact that police in Ferguson have been photographed with a matte black vehicle which appears to be a “Bearcat” MRAP, O’Connell told Newsweek that no St. Louis County law enforcement agencies have acquired any MRAPs through the 1033 program.

If the vehicle in the above Reuters photo is indeed an MRAP and not one of the nine “utility trucks” acquired by St. Louis County law enforcement, O’Connell said he does not know where it came from.

Police in Watertown, Connecticut, (population 22,514) recently acquired a mine-resistant, ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicle (sticker price: $733,000), designed to protect soldiers from roadside bombs, for $2,800. There has never been a landmine reported in Watertown, Connecticut.

Police in small towns in Michigan and Indiana have used the 1033 Program to acquire “MRAP armored troop carriers, night-vision rifle scopes, camouflage fatigues, Humvees and dozens of M16 automatic rifles,” the South Bend Tribune reported.

And police in Bloomington, Georgia, (population: 2,713) acquired four grenade launchers through the program, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.

Given the proliferation of military weapons and military training among America’s police departments, the use of military force and military tactics is not surprising. When your only tool is a hammer, after all, every problem looks like a nail.

Update: Missouri DPS Communications Director O’Connell on Thursday morning sent the following e-mail confirming that St. Louis law enforcement agencies also received 12 5.56 millimeter rifles and six .45 caliber pistols as part of 1033 Program.

Our DoD program rep was curious why no weapons showed up in her search yesterday. She searched a different way this morning and it showed that twelve 5.56 millimeter rifles and six .45 caliber pistols went to St. Louis County law enforcement agencies between Aug. 2, 2010 and Feb. 13, 2013. This was erroneously omitted from the report I sent you last night. She’s double checked again this morning and is confident this was the only omission.

I will not accuse Dave of being a scare monger, but I have a hard time believing everything he publishes. However this time he has raised a problem I have not formerly applied much importance on, and that is the number of foreign troops he expects to show up. This could be a real problem in a Nation too self centered to have demanded a contingent of State Militias. As it stands now with our dumbed down population, and lack of secure communications, a counter offensive is sure suicide, and only a handful of us will stand up and fight back. Not all of us are willing to die on our knees. Good luck America, you had a good run!

By Dave Hodges

This picture and depicts Russian soldiers at Ft. Carson. The Russians and other foreign troops (e.g. Germans, Canadians, Danes) are part of Jade Helm. They are here to carry out the mission should American troops stand down.

All world leaders, who are proxies for the New World Order know that their own individual military forces will not murder their own people in large enough numbers to make a difference with regard to citizen resistance to a nation’s fall into absolute tyranny.

The world is now witnessing the transfer of domestic military power to foreign entities and every citizen of every modern country in the world, should be extremely fearful. These foreign troops will have no compunction as to how many people that they will murder on the path to establishing a New World Order.

There are clear signs that the globalists are making their move to subjugate the entire G-20, and they are making that move, NOW.

The Bloodbath Will Commence with the Fall of the American Economy

Australia In Danger!

ABC News in Australia has announced that the Australian Government has just released a Multi- Billion Dollar Deal made with Singapore to House and Rotate 14,000 Singapore Soldiers. And of course, under the principle of incrementalism, it is only 14,000 troops today, but it could just as easily become 140,000 foreign troops tomorrow.

Under the agreement, that will bring combat troops from Singapore to Australia, the Australian people would fund the cost of expanding the Shoal water Bay Training Area and the Townsville Field Training Area, both in the north of Queensland state.

This is a move predicated towards the implementation of martial law and this also provides the foreign interlopers a permanent base of operations.

Many Australians have not surrendered their guns because many of them anticipated what was coming, namely, total economic collapse courtesy of the derivatives, and absolute gun confiscation which will be enforced with extreme prejudice. The Australian courts will not be involved in the coming martial law and ensuing gun confiscation activities. Foreign officers, in their field command capacity will be given the Carte Blanche authority to enforce gun confiscation to the letter of the law.

The Australian government has sold out their citizens and have set them up for foreign occupation the roll out a brutal martial law.

No Difference Between Australia and America

There is clear evidence that the foreign soldiers are going to be trained to take over the FEMA Camps and the question as to whether American forces would fire upon American citizens is a moot point.

Training Foreigners To Take Over the Camps

“This appendix addresses aspects of developing confinement officers in other countries. For the purposes of this appendix, the terms foreign and HN confinement officers are synonymous”.

Appendix NForeign Confinement Officer Training Program

Training U.S. Trainers

N-43. Soldiers and Marines who are assigned training missions receive a course of preparation to deal with the specific requirements of developing the target HN confinement officers (i.e. foreign detention officers). The course should emphasize the cultural background of the HN, introduce its language (to include specific confinement-related terms and phrases) and provide insights into cultural tips for developing a good rapport with HN personnel.

The beginning of this section attempts to create the illusion that foreign troops will be under the complete control of Army personnel. However, I believe it is likely that the mass exterminations of the detainees will take place when the American military is withdrawn from the facilities. If there was any doubt as to the fact that our soon-to-be jailers will be foreign and will have no hesitation to carry out mass genocide, the following regulation from the document should remove all doubt.

Training MethodsN-48. Training programs are designed to prepare HN personnel to eventually train themselves. Indigenous trainers are the best trainers and should be used to the maximum extent possible.

For nearly four years, I have interviewed numerous eyewitnesses on my talk show about the presence of foreign troops (mostly Russian) training on American soil. Sherrie Wilcox has presented videotape and still photo evidence. Others have provided their firsthand accounts of these events. I have detailed the existence of a FEMA bilateral agreement with the Russians to bring in 15,000 soldiers for “disaster training”. And despite all the evidence, there are people who have roundly criticized The Common Sense Show for accurately claiming there are foreign troops on American soil. Those who have refused to look at the evidence owe my people an apology. Second, the “bury their head in the sand crowd” ,will never know what will hit them when all hell breaks loose.

New World Order Forces Preparing to Counter American Military Forces Fighting a Guerrilla War

Australia, Singapore, or America, There Is No Difference As to What Is Coming

In the first week of February, I published several documents pertaining to UWEX 16, including the following advertisement for “role players” in this “drill”. The drill involves the following:

Does anyone else find it interesting that your government is practicing to fight rogue elements of the of the US military who are engaged in a guerrilla war?

Pulling Out the Stops

Mark Zuckerberg censoring Donald Trump.

Can Donald Trump save America and the world from global depression and martial law? Alex Jones weighs in on this topic.

Facebook has revealed that they have the ability and permission to block Trump posts. That by itself, may not mean much except to reveal Facebook’s position in the NWO. However, this action may be designed to assist Hillary.

Isn’t it curious that Clinton would like to have the same impact on American individual security as will the Singapore military in Australia?

Conclusion

The game plan is apparent. World leaders will cross-match their troops in attempt to subjugate each other’s citizens who would dare to resist such things as gun confiscation efforts. In the past, Obama has made it clear he has access to Russians, Chinese and now even Cubans. Hillary Clinton has exposed her hand as she has announced she will implement gun confiscation, Australian style. Further, FEMA camps will ultimately be manned by foreign soldiers. By the way, Singapore’s pilots train at Luke Air Force Base (Glendale, AZ.) on American F-16’s. Isn’t that interesting?

I would say that Trump has his hands full.

Comments Off on World Leaders Are Cross Matching Troops to Seize Guns and Impose Martial Law

I always approach each edition of the National Rifle Association’s magazine, American Rifleman, with some little trepidation, because of the disturbing content that all too often crops up in its editorials. The latest edition (May 2016) has once again proven that I am not merely a victim of intellectual paranoia.

In his regular column, “Standing Guard”, the NRA’s Executive Vice President, Wayne LaPierre, advises his readers that “When it Comes to Gun Rights, 2016 Election Is About the Court, Too”. The thrust of the column is Mr. LaPierre’s reiteration of the necessity for the NRA’s supporters to “elect a president who believes and will fight for the Second Amendment”, as well as to “elect a [Charles] Schumer-proof United States Senate and maintain the current Second Amendment majority”. As I have explained in an earlier NewsWithViews commentary entitled “NRA, Second Amendment, and ‘We the People’”, reliance on elections alone (even if they are conducted honestly) is an inadequate means to “fight for the Second Amendment”. For instance, no candidate for “the Office of President” who fails to champion revitalization of the Militia is actually “fight[ing] for the second Amendment” to the full extent the Constitution requires. After all, how can a candidate for that office expect to fulfill his constitutional authority and responsibility as “Commander in Chief * * * of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States”, when for all practical purposes “the Militia of the several States” are moribund throughout this country? Is not such a candidate’s “Job One” to correct that situation? The answer being obvious, I shall not rehash that matter here.

More disquieting in Mr. LaPierre’s column is his critique of certain statements made by the Justices who dissented from the Supreme Court’s decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago—namely, Justices Stevens, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Ginsburg. To be sure, their pronouncements certainly warrant scathing criticism, if not raucous ridicule. Unfortunately, Mr. LaPierre’s rejoinders are not much less faulty—perhaps, are even more indefensible, coming as they do from an ostensible proponent of the Second Amendment. He is not so much “standing guard” over the Amendment, as standing down from that purpose.

Mr. Lapierre quotes Justice Stevens in Heller as contending that:

The Second Amendment was adopted to protect the right of the people of each of the several States to maintain a well regulated militia … there is no indication that the Framers of the Amendment intended to enshrine the common-law right of self-defense in the Constitution.

Now, no one who reads all twenty-seven words of the Second Amendment—not just the last fourteen, which the NRA emphasizes to the virtual exclusion of the first thirteen (a mistake, curiously enough, which Justice Stevens did not make)—can doubt that Justice Stevens was perfectly correct (albeit, I suspect, only accidentally so) to assert that “[t]he Second Amendment was adopted to protect the right of the people of each of the several States to maintain a well regulated militia”. Nonetheless, he missed the essential point: that, if the people have a right “to maintain a well regulated militia” in each State, then there must actually be, in each State, “[a] well regulated Militia”, organized according to constitutional principles drawn from pre-constitutional American history, in which Militia “the people” as a whole actually participate. The “right of the people” thus imposes a corresponding duty, not only on each of “the several States”, but also on the General Government (primarily, through Congress), to ensure that such Militia are fully enrolled, organized, armed, disciplined, and governed at all times. That “right of the people” is also a duty of “the people” to serve in such Militia, because constitutional Militia are establishments with near-universal compulsory membership. They are the only organizations the Constitution recognizes which are based upon a general “draft”. Full support for these assertions can be found in my book Constitutional “Homeland Security”, Volume Two, The Sword and Sovereignty (Front Royal, Virginia: CD-ROM Edition, 2012), and therefore need not be repeated here.

What Justice Stevens did not understand (or refused to acknowledge) is that, as Article 13 of Virginia’s Declaration of Rights (1776) made clear, “a well regulated militia” is “composed of the body of the people, trained to arms”. That means that every able-bodied adult American (other than conscientious objectors) not only must be suitably armed as an individual, but also must be trained to use his arms effectively in a collective effort in aid of the community’s self-defense. Of course, the guarantee that each and every eligible individual always possesses arms suitable for some kind of Militia service will also ensure that such arms are available at all times for every such individual’s personal self-defense. So, pace Justice Stevens, by “protect[ing] the right of the people * * * to maintain * * * well regulated militia”, “the Framers” did indeed “enshrine the common-law right of self-defense in the Constitution”, for individuals acting as individuals in their own personal defense as well as for individuals acting collectively in defense of the community.

We know this with apodictic certainty because the very first constitutional authority and responsibility of the Militia is “to execute the Laws of the Union”, as well as the laws of their own States. And self-defense—whether exercised on behalf of the community as a whole or of a single individual—is the execution of the very highest of all human laws. As Sir William Blackstone (no mean student of the common law) explained with respect to the “defence of one’s self”:

the law * * * makes it lawful in [an individual] to do himself that immediate justice, to which he is prompted by nature, and which no prudential motives are strong enough to restrain. It considers that the future process of law is by no means an adequate remedy for injuries accompanied with force; since it is impossible to say, to what wanton lengths of rapine or cruelty outrages of this sort might be carried, unless it were permitted a man immediately to oppose one violence with another. Self-defense, therefore, as it is justly called the primary law of nature, so it is not, neither can it be in fact, taken away by the law of society.

Commentaries on the Laws of England (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Robert Bell, 1772), Volume 3, at 3-4.

Self-evidently, then, individual self-defense is, in fact and law, a microcosmic example of the macrocosmic right and duty of the Militia to execute “the primary law of nature” (and vice versa). This should be obvious, too, from the Second Amendment. For “the security of a free State” could hardly exist if individuals were unable to protect themselves, as individuals, from lone aggressors to the selfsame extent that they were able to protect themselves, as a community, from concerted attacks by large numbers of domestic or foreign aggressors (and vice versa). “A well regulated Militia” defends the community. The community, however, is composed of individuals. So, in defending the community, the members of the Militia are defending themselves as individuals, too. And even when an individual is simply defending himself against a single attacker in an isolated confrontation, he is also defending the community, because he is executing the very highest law of the community against the aggressor under circumstances in which no one else can come to his aid.

It is understandable that someone such as Justice Stevens could be hopelessly confused on this score. What, though, is to be said of Mr. LaPierre, who attacks Justice Stevens’ statement as “that arrogant defamation of liberty—utterly denigrating the individual right to keep and bear arms”. Is it conceivable that for Justice Stevens to link “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” with the Militia is an “arrogant defamation of liberty”, when the Second Amendment itself identifies “[a] well regulated Militia” as “necessary to the security of a free State”? Do individuals in “a free State” not enjoy “liberty”? And, if they do (as is incontestably the case), is not “[a] well regulated Militia * * * necessary to the security” of their “liberty”? Or is the Constitution wrong on that point? One wonders whether Mr. LaPierre has ever pondered such questions.

Mr. LaPierre then quotes Justice Breyer’s dissent in McDonald:

“[T]he Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self-defense.” And “By its terms, the Second Amendment does not apply to the States; read properly, it does not even apply to individuals outside of the militia context.” Justice Breyer fumed. “After all, the Amendment’s militia-related purpose is primarily to protect the States from federal regulation, not to protect individuals.”

Of course, Mr. LaPierre is fully justified in treating these statements as rank gibberish—

First, as explained above, the Second Amendment certainly does “protect a private right of armed self-defense”. Can even Justice Breyer believe that a member of the Militia, required by law to possess a firearm in his own home at all times, does not enjoy a “private right” to employ that firearm for personal self-defense, in addition to his right and duty as a member of the Militia to execute the law against whoever attacks him?

Second, to what vanishingly small set of citizens does the Second Amendment not apply, because the constituent individuals are “outside of the Militia context”? “A well regulated Militia” includes all able-bodied adults from, typically, 16 years of age on up. Only individuals convicted of the most serious crimes, and those who (although otherwise able-bodied) suffer from some disabling mental disease or defect, are excluded. (Conscientious objectors are not required to possess firearms, but must perform some other Militia service.)

Third, the right—and duty—of “the people to keep and bear Arms” so as to be able to serve in “well regulated Militia” must apply first and foremost to and in their own States, because the Militia are “the Militia of the several States”, not “the Militia of the United States”. Do not the States themselves enjoy a right and labor under a duty to provide in their own territories what the Constitution declares to be “necessary to the security of a free State” everywhere without exception throughout the Union? Is their “security” as “free State[s]” to be left to the mercies of errant public officials in the General Government? What if insouciant, incompetent, or disloyal officials of that government fail, neglect, or refuse to provide the requisite measures of “security”? Must “free State[s]” then collapse throughout the United States, with no recourse in self-help?

To be sure, Congress labors under the constitutional duty “[t]o provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia” for the purposes of “execut[ing] the Laws of the Union, suppress[ing] Insurrections and repel[ling] Invasions”. But what has it done to date (actually, since 1903)? It has consigned almost all Americans to the constitutionally oxymoronic “unorganized militia”, leaving them unprepared to perform any Militia service in defense of either their communities or themselves as individuals. Were the right and duty of “the people” to serve in “well regulated Militia” fully enforced by the States, though, Congress’s default would not matter to a critical degree, because Militia properly “well regulated” by their own States would be prepared to fulfill all of the responsibilities “necessary to the security of a free State”, including the three the Constitution specifies.

Fourth, the General Government’s only regulatory authority in the premises is to organize, arm, discipline, and train the Militia, and to govern such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, for one or more of the three explicit constitutional purposes quoted above, and for nothing else. The Constitution authorizes no other regulation—and most emphatically no regulation which directly violates “the supreme Law of the Land” by purporting to “unorganize” or “disarm” the Militia. Furthermore, an unconstitutional regulation of the Militia which harms the States necessarily harms “the body of the people” who make up the Militia, and therefore harms the vast majority of the able-bodied adult individuals who make up society. So, pace Justice Breyer, if the Second Amendment provides any protection at all, it assuredly “protect[s] individuals”.

But if Justice Breyer is all wet, does Mr. Lapierre stand on drier ground? Does Mr. LaPierre imagine that “the people” have no right to require their own States to maintain the very—indeed, the only—institutions which the Constitution declares to be “necessary to the security of a free State”? Are the States to be suffered to behave as other than “free State[s]” by simply dispensing with their Militia? One would hope not. Yet is this not the terminus to which acceptance of “the individual right to keep and bear arms”, so precious to Mr. LaPierre, now leads this country?

Mr. LaPierre then scoffs at what he calls Justice Stevens’ “off-the-wall dissent” in McDonald:

Stevens wrote, “[T]he experience of other advanced democracies, including those that share our British heritage, undercuts the notion that an expansive right to keep and bear arms is intrinsic to ordered liberty. … “[I]t is silly—indeed, arrogant—to think we have nothing to learn from the billions of people beyond our borders.”

Mr. LaPierre rightly derides this claptrap.

The laws of foreign nations are both irrelevant and impertinent with respect to how America’s Constitution should be construed and applied. As to foreign nations in general, I have written a book to that effect. How To Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary (San Antonio, Texas: Vision Forum Ministries, 2004). As to Great Britain in particular, immediately pre-constitutional American history provides a veritable library, culminating in the record of General Gage’s attempt to impose “gun control” on the Colonists in Lexington and Concord in 1775—the event memorialized, for example, as part of “A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North America, now met in General Congress at Philadelphia, setting forth the causes and necessity of their taking up arms” (Thursday, 6 July 1775), Journals of the Continental Congress, Volume 2, at 150-151. (In this regard, Mr. LaPierre would do well to recall that Americans resisted British tyranny on 19 April 1775, not by anarchic exercises of some imaginary “individual right to keep and bear arms”, but by turning out in a collective fashion as Local units of the Militia of Massachusetts.)

Pace Justice Stevens, Americans’ first task must be to learn, not from foreign sources but from their own Constitution, what “liberty” means—and especially what institutions and practices are required to preserve it. The most important precept (because the Constitution singles it out) is that “[a] well regulated Militia”—not an imaginary “individual right to keep and bear arms”—is “necessary to the security of a free State”. Having learned that much, Americans can compare the state of “liberty” in their own country (in which a large proportion of the citizenry remains armed), with the general nonexistence of “liberty” in foreign nations (in which disarmament of the populace is the usual state of affairs). What America’s Founding Fathers understood as “liberty” under “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” may be slipping into an increasingly perilous condition in this country; but it is largely defunct almost everywhere else. What (in Justice Stevens’ words) “we have * * * to learn about liberty from the billions of people beyond our borders” is that the deterioration of “liberty” here and its elimination there are not mere accidents of history. They derive from disregard of the first thirteen words of the Second Amendment in this country, and from the absence of the entire text of that Amendment in the organic laws of other countries.

Finally, Mr. LaPierre rightly chides Justice Ginsburg for once saying that she “would not look to the U.S. Constitution if [she] were drafting a constitution * * * . [She] might look to the Constitution of South Africa[.]” “You might ask,” writes Mr. LaPierre, “why would a U.S. Supreme Court justice prefer another constitution to that which was forged in Philadelphia more than 200 years ago?” The explanation as to Justice Ginsburg, no doubt, is that she subscribes to a legal and political ideology incompatible with—indeed, diametrically opposed to—the principles of America’s Constitution, and therefore “prefer[s] another constitution” of her own imagining. What, though, is the explanation as to Mr. LaPierre?

Exactly what constitution, informed by what legal and political ideology, does he prefer? Apparently, it is a constitution with no firm grounding in pre-constitutional American legal history, a constitution to be construed on the basis of an ideology which licenses its exponents to dissect the Second Amendment, to disregard if not discard the Amendment’s first thirteen words, to disrespect the judgment of the Founders that “[a] well regulated Militia” is “necessary to the security of a free State”, and to discourage the members of the NRA, as well as those sympathetic to it throughout this country, from associating themselves with the Militia in thought, word, and deed, except when they deny that the Militia have any significant relationship to “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms”.

Misinterpretations of the Constitution with such an undercurrent of animosity towards the Militia could be expected to be broadcast by a certain “poverty” law center, notorious for its rabid opposition to the Second Amendment. Why they keep emanating from the NRA, however, passes understanding. Perhaps it really is true that whom the gods would destroy they first make mad. Unfortunately, if allowed to fester much longer this particular madness will destroy, not only the NRA, but the rest of us as well.

Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).

For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.

He has written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals, and lectured throughout the county. His most recent work on money and banking is the two-volume Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2002), the most comprehensive study in existence of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective. www.piecesofeight.us

He is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered crash of the Federal Reserve System, and the political upheaval it causes. www.crashmaker.com

He can be reached at his new address:
52 Stonegate Court
Front Royal, VA 22630.

E-Mail: Not available

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

There is no logic in a man as intellectually accomplished as Mr. Vieira when he ignores the true issue confronting American’s. Take this to the bank Dr. Vieira there is no active constitutional republic on this Continent, which negates any reliance on the Original Constitution forthe United States of America. That Constitution was over-run by the Constitution of the United States of America, and followed by several versions of privately owned Corporations, which is why we have NEVER had a militia of the several states, and never will due to the IGNORANCE of the people. UNLESS a hundred million people read this book, absolute tyranny is just around the corner. You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause (Paperback) by Judge Anna Maria Riezinger & James Clinton Belcher

Idiocy Abounds – Global Currency Reset? Ya – right.

By Anna Von Reitz

I am amazed but not amused to receive all these joyous rumormill announcements about the “Global Reset” and how we shall all soon be “millionaires” and how America is going to “lead the way” into this new era of “abundance and prosperity”.

Are all those sending these message around the globe completely mad? Dumbed down to the extent that they cannot easily calculate the affect of giving everyone “millions of dollars” all at once?

Any such fiat digital “money” masquerading as a “US Dollar” will be rendered useless overnight.

As it was in Weimar Germany, it will be here. It will cost a million such “dollars” for a loaf of bread.

And you think this is something to celebrate?

Did your Mothers all drop you on your heads?

The long planned and announced “devaluation” of the so-called “dollar” and the end of the fiat money system is right on schedule. It will be brought about by hyper-inflation created when the banks flood every bank account with millions of meaningless digits.

And what does it cost these banks to place digits in accounts? A few key strokes? And you think that this is meaningful? You think it is anything but another act of venal, destructive, self-interested fraud?

Wake to hell up out of your greedy dreams and hear the birds singing.

(1) Any such “dollars” will be worthless.

(2) Anyone using them will be complicit in the fraud.

(3) This will be the “excuse” the perpetrators of the fraud will use to hunt you down and steal your property.

Call them on it now before they even start the gimmick and get yourselves out of their “Dodge”.

YOU is not you the living man or woman. YOU — this corporate persona created “for” you by people and organizations merely claiming to “represent” you, is an ESTATE trust based on the pretension that you are “civilly dead” and that you agreed to this “status”, when in fact you were never told a word about any of this crappola. So when you see YOUR NAME in all caps, including when you see YOUR NAME on any “personal bank account”—- know that the word “person” means “corporation” and has meant that since 1864 in Federalese.

Money has to have value in and of itself in order to be money. Paper has only the value of paper. For decades the “Federal United States” has been bilking you out of your actual assets in exchange for worthless I.O.U.’s printed on paper. This paper is called “commercial paper” and their “Federal Reserve Notes” are “promissory notes” (I.O.U.s) based on bonds issued in YOUR name. What are bonds? More promissory notes!

When these charlatans seized upon and copyrighted and registered your given name under the guise of merely recording it, they seized control of your identity— and committed identity theft. They set up a “strawman trust” and named it after you and pretended that this “trust” contained your body, the value of your labor, your land, your businesses— everything that you could ever own. Without telling you a word about this, they pretended that you knew about this and agreed to it. And then based on the value of all your property, they “bonded” it—-used it all as collateral backing their own debts.

Now they have defaulted on those debts and they have been denied bankruptcy protection because they are crooks and deserve none. However, that leaves YOU — your supposed ESTATE trust— on the hook to pay for all their debts and all the bonds that they floated internationally in YOUR GOOD NAME.

People who are going around crowing that your “birth certificate is worth millions” need to be asked — millions of what and millions to whom? For the victims of this identity theft and credit fraud—that means you, your friends, your neighbors— those “millions” are millions of DEBT owed to mostly foreign creditors.

If you willingly “monetize” your own BC and access all that juicy credit, all you do is admit and accept that you are part of the fraud and liable as a criminal for it and you also otherwise indebt yourself and your children and your grandchildren to pay off the debt thus created.

So what is a Birth Certificate? It is an insurance indemnity agreement entered into without your knowledge or consent with a now insolvent privately owned corporation, seemingly agreeing to let them use you, your given name, and your other assets as collateral backing their debts — like co-signing for a car loan for Cousin Bubba, only not being told about this cozy arrangement by Cousin Bubba or the bank extending I.O.U.s in YOUR GOOD NAME to the rest of the world.

This circumstance makes you the Priority Creditor of YOU, but since the perpetrators never recorded your actual birth on the land, there is no public record of your existence except the condemning evidence that a Birth Certificate Bond was entered in your given name.

So here come the Secondary Creditors— all those people to whom these schmucks sold bonds based on your name, your assets, your labor, etc., — wanting to be paid back, and you wake up with a jolt and say — “What? I owe you guys $8 million dollars?”

It is at this moment that you need to remember that just as there is a “National Debt” which the foreign nation of the “United States” defined as “territories and District of Columbia” trumped up against YOUR GOOD NAME, there is also an equal “National Credit” owed to YOU —-as long as you don’t take the bait.

What is the bait? The lure of “easy money”— the millions of useless fiat “dollars” they are preparing to download in all your bank accounts as “payment” of their debts to YOU, so that they can saddle the real you with having to pay off their debts with actual labor and actual assets, not just bunko made out of paper.

Spread the word far and wide and send the members of “Con-gress” a letter they won’t forget telling them and the banks they work for that you are onto their schemes and attempts to “pay off” their “National Debt” with more reams of worthless paper. Call them on it before they can even launch this attempt to hoodwink the people again.

The banks and the bankers have cashiered the value of your labor and your assets– your “National Credit” into gold they have hoarded up for themselves. They are following a plan that has been in place since 1913. That plan is to (1) steal and confiscate all the gold and silver they can and (2) make the grandsons of the men they stole it from buy it back at hyper-inflated prices. Note— the price of gold in 1928 was around $30 per ounce. It is now around $1300 per ounce. The difference between $30 and $1300 is what they are hoping to capture as pure profit for themselves, but that only happens if they force everyone onto the “gold standard”.

That’s why all these banks are offering “free gold”— the casino operators are priming the pump by offering free casino chips. And just to make sure you have no other option, their partners in crime at the IMF are threatening to give you “millions of dollars”—- digits dumped into your bank accounts — just worthless keystrokes— for you to “spend”—–which will completely devalue the fiat money and give them an excuse to say that they paid YOU back for all the labor and the mortgages and the false debts they piled on you and your assets.

Oh, no, no, no, no, children. Be not like dumb, driven cattle. Be wise as a serpent and gentle as a dove. Tell them the truth about all this. Make it clear that you know what they are doing and why. Make it clear before the IMF even starts its campaign that you know what they are doing. Write letters to the UN Secretary General and the Security Council and the President of FRANCE and the Pope and the Queen and the Congress and as many of the other criminals you can think of and say, no, thank you. We will have our property back and the debts erased. Do the bookkeeping. Cancel the National Debt against the National Credit and keep the change. We will not be enslaved by any act of fraud or any false claim you care to make.

The RESISTER has confirmed that US Navy SEAL platoons, including SEAL Team Six, Marine combat veterans stationed at Twenty-Nine Palms, CA, and Marine basic trainees at Camp Pendelton, CA, have been administered a questionnaire asking, among other things, if they would “…fire upon US citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the US government.”

The questionnaire was first administered to operators by the commanders of SEAL Team Six on 15 September 1993, then subsequently to the remaining SEAL platoons throughout September and October. Rumors began circulating in November that US Army DELTA operators were given the same or similar questionnaire. The SF Underground had been aware of the questionnaire since late September but our observers had been unable to secure a copy or confirm other than its substance consisted of questions pertaining to the subordination of the US Military to the UN and confiscation of the firearms of US citizens. In early January, 1994, we obtained a copy of the questionnaire from one of our DOD sympathizers but lacking corroboration we ran the story in Vol.I, No.1 of The RESISTER as a rumor.

On January 22, 1994, one of our observers copied a chilling message off the Internet from Petty Officer 2nd Class W. Kelly, US Navy Special Warfare Team Six, to D. Hawkins, Re: Gun Confiscation. Kelly began by stating that the questionnaire was “…to find out if we would follow the orders of commanding officers without question.” (Kelly omitted the fact that the questionnaire assumes “commanding officers” gives equal authority to UN officers commanding US forces.) Kelly continued; “If you wish to find out how I answered I said yes I would fire and kill all persons attempting to resist…we aren’t around to be the good guys.” Remember, Kelly is referring to American civilians.

In February, 1994, MODERN GUN magazine ran a story on the elusive questionnaire which was subsequently circulated by various patriotic citizens groups. Then, on 10 May, 1994, the questionnaire was administered to Marine Desert Storm veterans at Twenty-Nine Palms, CA. A Marine smuggled a copy of the questionnaire out of the testing center and mailed it on 15 May, 1994, with a cover letter, to the editor of THE NEW AMERICAN, which ran the story in their July 11, 1994, issue. THE NEW AMERICAN quotes the Marine’s impression that the questionnaire “was just research for this (Navy) commander’s(sp) degree.” The RESISTER obtained a copy of the Marine’s letter, which actually states: “A Navy Commander came before us and said he was working on his masters degree and he was writing a paper about giving up our military’s soverenty(sp) to the United Nations Secretary General.”

The official DOD lie surrounding the questionnaire entitled “Combat Arms Survey,” supports that of the Navy Commander. Significantly, the Combat Arms Survey was first given at the time Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 25 was being prepared. The RESISTER’s correspondent in the Pentagon staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff confirms that PDD 25 surrenders control of the U.S. military to the United Nations. (A cursory survey of articles written by MACOM commanders and staff members in official military journals for the past year reveals a universal acceptance of U.N. control of the American military.)

The RESISTER has been eliciting responses to the questionnaire for the past year. Frighteningly, among service members with less than 10 years of service, 63% agree or strongly agree with question # 46: “I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.” Among new recruits almost 90% give the response: “If it’s the law and they order me to do it I guess it’s okay.” Our federally controlled public schools have done their job.

Of those with more than 15 years of service, 87% replied “disagree” or “strongly disagree.” Responses by members of the Special Forces Underground were unprintable; basically, there will not be many officers who give that order more than once.

The RESISTER has enclosed a copy of the Combat Arms Survey with this issue. As you read it pay particular attention to the qualifiers and their relation to recent articles in the official publications of the Department of Defense, the civilian media, and the policies of the federal government. *

Editorial Note The enclosed Combat Arms Survey is a true and accurate reproduction of the contents of the questionnaire. We altered the format to accommodate the The RESISTER’s layout. THE EDITOR

COMBAT ARMS SURVEY

This questionnaire is to gather data concerning the attitudes of combat trained personnel with regards to nontraditional missions. All of your responses are confidential. Write your answers directly on the questionnaire form. In Part II, place an “X” in the space provided for your response.

Part I. Demographics

What service are you in?

What is your pay grade? (e.g. E-7, O-7)

What is your MOS code and description?

What is your highest level of education in years?

How many months did you serve in Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield?

How many months did you serve in Somalia?

What state or country did you primarily reside in during childhood?

Part II. Attitudes

Do you feel that U.S. Combat troops should be used within the United States for any of the following missions?

allowed to serve in U.S. combat units during these exercises under U.S.

command and control.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

The United Nations runs a field training exercise. U.S. combat troops

under U.S. command and control should serve in U.N. combat units during these

exercises.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

The United Nations runs a field training exercise. U.S. combat troops

should serve under U.N. command and control in U.N. during these exercises.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

U.S. combat troops should participate in U.N. missions as long as the U.S.

has full command and control.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

U.S. combat troops should participate in U.N. missions under United

Nations command and control.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

U.S. combat troops should be commanded by U.N. officers and non-

commissioned (NCOs) at battalion and company levels while performing U.N.

missions.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

It would make no difference to me to have U.N. soldiers as members of my

team. (e.g. fire team, squad, platoon)

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

It would make no difference to me to take orders from a U.N. company

commander.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

I feel the President of the United States has the authority to pass his

responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief to the U.N. Secretary General.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

I feel there is no conflict between my oath of office and serving as a

U.N. soldier.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

I feel my unit’s combat effectiveness would not be affected by performing

humanitarian missions for the United Nations.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

I feel a designated unit of U.S. combat soldiers should be permanently

assigned to the command and control of the United Nations.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

I would be willing to volunteer for assignment to a U.S. combat unit under

a U.N. commander.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

I would like U.N. member countries, including the U.S., to the U.N. all

the soldiers necessary to maintain world peace.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

I would swear to the following code:

“I am a United Nations fighting person. I serve in the forces which

maintain world peace and every nation’s way of life. I am prepared to give my

life in their defense.”

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale,

transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty (30) day

amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over the local

authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to

turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement:

I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of

firearms banned by the U.S. government.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion

*

End Note

Our civilian readers maybe wondering why the Combat Arms Survey was circulated so heavily within the Department of the Navy. The reason is simple; the Navy is not subject to USC Title 10 Posse Comitatus prohibitions against using federal military forces for domestic law enforcement. This includes the US Marine Corps.

Just thought you would like to know.

THE STAFF[Resistor, Ed.]

OLDDOGS COMMENTS!

Just more evidence of how effective government controlled education really is. As for me, I would shoot any commander that ordered me to kill Americans if they refused to surrender their lawfully owned weapons. THE UNITED COMMUNIST STATES OF AMERICA is not my country or government. The politicians who have merged America with the U.N. should be hung by the ankles and stoned until they die.

You are in the same boat as many Americans — confused, angry, wanting to do something, but not knowing what to do or how to do it. This is primarily because you were never taught anything valuable about how your government is supposed to be organized and operated or why.

The short answer is to organize township (or parish), county, and state unincorporated jural assemblies. That is Job One, and the good folk of Michigan and the good folk of Colorado and Florida and Georgia and Texas have already done the trail blazing for everyone else. As a result, you can use their guidebook published by the Michigan General Jural Assembly as a template to organize your own local jural assemblies.

What is a jural assembly? It is an unincorporated association of free men and women who organize in support of the public and organic law of these United States (the states holding the land jurisdiction) to enforce the same; they elect the local Assemblymen for the townships and counties, and the county Assemblymen then meeting compose a state jural assembly.

These are the lawful bodies of living men and women who “self-govern” the land jurisdiction of these United States and who are responsible for enforcing the Law of the Land including the Organic Law and the United States Statutes at Large.

They are also responsible for electing Common Law Court Justices, Sheriffs on the Land, form Grand Juries, serve as Trial Jurors and as Electors (not “Voters”) and serve to administer every aspect of their local and state governments.

Remember the phrase “self-governing”? We are responsible for governing ourselves, via this process of self-assembly, but when we fail to do this (or worse, become so dumbed-down that we don’t realize that we have to do this) it leaves a vacuum of power begging to be filled.

All this time that people have been roaming about ranting about the “De Facto” government versus the “De Jure” government and wondering where their government went and who stole it from them — I guess it never occurred to them that they are their own enemies and the missing parties who aren’t doing their own jobs.

The groups and entities that have stepped forward to fill the gap created by our “absence” are naturally self-interested. If we are stupid enough not to govern ourselves, someone else will be glad to do it for us and also glad to charge us

for their services and defraud us and rob us and even murder us for profit.

The lawful government of these United States has been left to rot and ruin because of ignorance promoted by the “public school” system put in place by incorporated “states”. These “states of states” are franchises of large private, mostly foreign owned governmental services corporations.

To understand how all this came about you must go back to the founding of this country.

The American organic states belong to us in sum total— air, land, and sea jurisdictions all belong to us and to our progeny, but as part of the settlement of the Revolutionary War, some concessions were made.

The British had the best navy in the world and stood at the start of the industrial revolution. They desperately needed our agricultural products. We had no navy to speak of, only a commercial fleet that was constantly ravaged by privateers, so that we had a hard time getting our goods to market. So we struck a deal with King George. He agreed to act as our Trustee on the High Seas and Inland Waterways (protect our shipping, in other words) and we agreed to let him control our international trade relations (get first dibs and best prices on American commodities, in other words).

British Subjects were allowed to remain in America for the purpose of providing essential governmental services related to this deal. See the Definitive Treaty of Peace, Paris, 1783, where they are described as “inhabitants” who “reside” here, as opposed to the “free, sovereign and independent people of the United States” who live here permanently. See Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 of The Constitution for the united States of America, which makes this explicit.

All this gives rise to two different populations living together on this continent— American State Nationals and British Subjects. Over time, semantic deceits were slowly introduced over the two words “United States” which have several meanings.

One meaning of “United States” is the federation of separate sovereign nation-states known as the Continental United States, and the other meaning, secretively adopted by members of Congress operating as a Board of Directors for The United States of America, Inc., is “territories and District of Columbia”.

This second meaning of “United States” is what the Federales are talking about when they ask if you are a citizen of the United States? That is, are you a citizen of the territories and District of Columbia, like someone born in DC? Or a member of the military or federal civil service who temporarily adopts that “citizenship” status while employed by the Federal Corporation?

If you say, “Yes, I’m a citizen of the United States.” thinking of the federation of the separate sovereign state, they self-interestedly interpret it to mean that you are or want to be considered a “citizen of the United States” instead.

Who are they to complain if you want to voluntarily subject yourself to them and accept having them and their Queen ruling over you?

They will eagerly grant you “dual citizenship” and herd you like sheep into their fold and begin the process of sheering you without mercy, because they are in business here. Their only purpose is to provide “governmental services” and make money doing so.

If they can force you to buy more and more and more “services”— Social Security all the way to Obummercare— and charge you for it, from their perspective—why not? If they can create 80,000,000 regulations for you to follow, and then hire a bunch of thugs to keep you in line and charge you fines every time you color outside their lines, why not? It’s Big Business. Literally.

The problem is that this was so lucrative it was a temptation the Brits and French couldn’t refuse. So they colluded together against their clueless American Allies.

At the start of all this, the Virginia Company doing business as The United States (trading company) took over The Contract and began providing the nineteen enumerated services our states agreed to receive. That company was bankrupted by Lincoln and a competing company doing business as the United States of America (Inc.) took over and operated until 1933 when it was bankrupted and a third version (French) took over and operated as the UNITED STATES (INC.) until 2015, when this “governmental services corporation” was declared insolvent.

None of these “governmental services corporations” have a damned thing to do with us or our lawful government really. They are subcontractors providing services, like a lawn maintenance company that you hire to trim your hedges and mow your lawn and rake your leaves. The various “United States Congresses” that have sat as Board of Directors for these corporations and who are supposed to be riding herd on these subcontractors and looking out for your best interests have long ago grabbed the bit in their teeth and operated as self-interested oligarchs instead.

Each one of these separate governmental services corporations has its own regulations. The old “United States of America” that operated both in and out of bankruptcy from 1868 to 1999 formulated the entire 50 Titles of Federal Code that everyone still refers to.

The UNITED STATES (INC.) repealed all 50 Titles and kept only part of Title 50 as the basis of its operations and that is its only internal law, aside from Washington, DC Municipal Code.

And now that the UNITED STATES (INC.) is insolvent, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC., a spin-off of the World Bank and the UN Corporation, is here providing government services on speculation, on a “for hire” basis, but they have already been told, “Thanks, but no thanks.” based on the prior performance of Rothschild affiliates who ran the old United States of America, Inc. into the ground and also contrived to fraudulently involve us in their bankruptcy and who also began the mechanized process of entrapping us via semantic deceit and secretively changing our birthright political status via fraud and non-consensual private contracting processes.

All the above, explains why we cannot just “charge them under the Smith Act” and other such suggestions.

The “Smith Act” and all the other various “Acts” undertaken by the “United States Congress” were private corporate laws embraced by a corporation that no longer exists. It’s bankruptcy settled in 1999. All 50 Titles of Federal Code became obsolete at that moment.

Then the UNITED STATES (INC.) a French-based governmental services corporation running under a small part of Title 50 and Washington DC Municipal Code took over the “federal” services contract, and ran our credit into the ground for another 15 years without our consent and without any of our international Trustees— the Popes, the British Monarch, or the United States Postmaster — objecting to this fraud and thievery.

At the current moment, we remain running our own states-on-the-land government via jural assemblies operated under the Organic and Public Law of the United States, known as the United States Statutes-at-Large; and, for the moment, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC., funded by the World Bank and operated by the UN Corporation, has stepped in without a contract to provide the necessary services on a “for hire” basis and just for shits and grins is operating according to the old Federal Code, without formally adopting it.

Karen Hudes has falsely described this situation as an “interregnum” during which time there is no government, but in fact, we have been here clicking along in spite of the frauds and bankruptcies and “wars” and everything else that these “governmental services corporations” have engaged in. The so-called “Federal Government” which has never been a sovereign government of any kind may be in complete disarray, but we, the people, of these United States are not.

Enemies of our peace, freedom and standing have not only mischaracterized us as “citizens of the United States”, they went before the United Nations Trust Committees and the UN Security Council and claimed that we no longer exist as fifty sovereign nation-states. They complained that we have not exercised our government on the land jurisdiction, that we have no national currency left in circulation—- both lies, and, they claimed that we no longer had representation in the international community—- thanks to the fact that the UNITED STATES, INC. went insolvent without naming a Successor to Contract.

Whereupon we issued new Sovereign Letters Patent to the United Nations Secretary General and the United Nations Trust Committees and the United Nations Security Council, informing them that yes, we are still very much alive and kicking, and that By The Way, we have negotiated an agreement with two of the sovereign indigenous nations that have representation in the United Nations, the Lakota Sioux and the Athabascan Nation, and issued a Declaration of Joint Sovereignty to memorialize the agreement.

Thus we are still standing, still have our Constitution in full affect, and are still operating our actual government. We still have the United States Silver Dollar in circulation. We still have our Public Law under enforcement. We have named new “federal” agents for the purposes of international negotiations and trade. We will in our good time act through our jural assemblies to name fiduciary Deputies as delegates to a Continental Congress to settle this hash and in the meantime, it should be well-understood by all parties that we are empowered and entitled to enforce the Law of the Land which includes the actual Constitution and the United States Statutes-at-Large against all and any federal employees or federal state-of-state employees, such as “State of Washington” or “WASHINTON” or “State of Colorado” or “COLORADO” franchise employees found trespassing against any of us or on our soil in violation of their corporate charters or our Public Law.

[A further conundrum and confusion was created back in the 1950-60’s when organizations serving as state and county governments were lured by the promise of “federal revenue sharing” to incorporate—- an act that transformed them from being legitimate governments operating our landed estates to being private corporate franchises operating in the international jurisdiction of the sea. Any time you see the word “of” as in “State of Ohio” or “STATE OF OHIO” or see a name in all capitals like “WISCONSIN” you know that you are dealing with one of these deceptively named corporate franchises.]

I trust this goes a long way toward answering your question why we can’t seem to get enforcement of all the federal and state laws and Acts of Congress that are on the books. It’s because the corporations that adopted these private laws, called “statutes” and “regulations” and “codes”, no longer exist. The only actual government still standing on this Continent is that of the people, for the people and by the people, and the only Law still standing is our Organic Law and our United States Statutes at Large.

As more Americans wake up and say, “WTF? I wasn’t born in Puerto Rico! I ain’t no flipping “citizen of the United States”——!” and as more and more Americans organize Jural Assemblies to enforce the actual Organic and Public Law in their townships, counties, and states—- it will all start to make a lot more sense.

The French Government is culpable for not restraining and insuring the lawful operation of both the UN Corporation and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and its subsidiaries including the UNITED STATES and the STATE OF….. franchises these organizations established here.

The British Government and the Government of Westminster are culpable for practicing press-ganging, inland piracy, unlawful conversion, and numerous other known international crimes against us and against our lawful government mostly via their undeclared foreign agents, including the members of the American Bar Association.

The international city-state District of Columbia and its government known as the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation are similarly guilty of these crimes against the American People, and have attempted to run a “government of the person, by the person, and for the person” in a mockery of our lawful government on the land.

As a result of criminality on the part of those both elected and appointed to act as our Trustees internationally and nationally, and the corporations they have operated against us in Breach of Trust, we have been plundered under color of law, suffered identity theft in contravention of the Geneva Convention Protocols of 1949, suffered credit theft and theft of our actual resources, and are now being threatened by these same thugs as they are now offering to literally kill off their Priority Creditors, the American People, in the same way they killed off the Jewish People who were their Priority Creditors in Nazi-Era Germany.

Every American needs to be alerted to these actual circumstance and every community needs to be organized in the event that international negotiations related to these matters break down and the British, French, Israeli, and District of Columbia so-called “US” forces have to be restrained.

You are all encouraged to spread the word from the members of Congress on down to the lowest levels of “their government” that we are fully aware now and that the false claims against us and our property must come to an immediate full stop. Federal employees, especially agency employees and appointed administrators, must be re-educated.

Any attempt by the IMF dba UNITED STATES dba “STATE OF OHIO” and other franchises to attack Americans using agencies including the “FBI” and “CIA” and “FEMA”, etc., will be instantly recognized as the acts of foreign commercial mercenary armies on our shores, not the result of any civil war or unrest naturally arising within America or as the result of American politics, race relations, or religious antagonisms at all.

We know who we are and we know who did this to us and we know why they did it. We have stated it clearly and plainly before the whole world, before all the assembled governments, and before the people of all nations. We have notified the Pope, the Queen, the Secretary of the Treasury, the United States Treasurer, the United States Post Master and the United Nations Secretary General and literally thousands of other officials.

If the IMF and its subsidiaries or the FEDERAL RESERVE and its subsidiaries—either one—are allowed to take any action whatsoever against the peaceful and non-combatant American People under the false pretense that we are or ever were legitimately and knowingly operating as “persons” or as “citizens of the United States” these acts of genocide will be recognized as precisely the acts of criminals seeking to kill off their Priority Creditors and nothing more than that— just the vicious and immoral and unjustified actions of the guilty against the innocent.

It has not been enough for them to steal us blind; now they seek to blame us for their criminality and to force us to pay for their debts at the point of a bayonet.

No American is forced to continue any contract with the “United States” military under these circumstances of fraud and false undisclosed contract. No American is obligated in any way to fire upon Americans. No American who takes part in any unlawful court actions or foreclosures or seizures of property or confiscations of any kind will be held guiltless.

It is time for all elected officials and all bureaucrats to be on High Alert and to remember the results of the Nuremberg Trials—- “just following orders” is not an excuse for murder, plundering, piracy, unlawful conversion, press-ganging, enslavement, involuntary servitude, identity theft, credit theft, conspiracy against our Constitution and the other crimes that the IMF and FEDERAL RESERVE have jointly indulged in on our shores.

Let it also be clearly understood that Americans all maintain our absolute right to defend ourselves and our families and our property with deadly force if need be. Should the Pope and other international trustees fail their duty as they have repeatedly done in the past, any and all bloodshed on this continent will rest squarely on their shoulders.

Lesser consumption of animal products is necessary to save the world from the worst impacts of climate change, UN report says

An cattle ranch in Mato Grosso, Brazil. The UN says agriculture is on a par with fossil fuel consumption because both rise rapidly with increased economic growth. Photograph: Daniel Beltra/Greenpeace.

A global shift towards a vegan diet is vital to save the world from hunger, fuel poverty and the worst impacts of climate change, a UN report said today.

As the global population surges towards a predicted 9.1 billion people by 2050, western tastes for diets rich in meat and dairy products are unsustainable, says the report from United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) international panel of sustainable resource management.

It says: “Impacts from agriculture are expected to increase substantially due to population growth increasing consumption of animal products. Unlike fossil fuels, it is difficult to look for alternatives: people have to eat. A substantial reduction of impacts would only be possible with a substantial worldwide diet change, away from animal products.”

Professor Edgar Hertwich, the lead author of the report, said: “Animal products cause more damage than [producing] construction minerals such as sand or cement, plastics or metals. Biomass and crops for animals are as damaging as [burning] fossil fuels.”

The panel of experts ranked products, resources, economic activities and transport according to their environmental impacts. Agriculture was on a par with fossil fuel consumption because both rise rapidly with increased economic growth, they said.

Ernst von Weizsaecker, an environmental scientist who co-chaired the panel, said: “Rising affluence is triggering a shift in diets towards meat and dairy products – livestock now consumes much of the world’s crops and by inference a great deal of freshwater, fertilisers and pesticides.”

Both energy and agriculture need to be “decoupled” from economic growth because environmental impacts rise roughly 80% with a doubling of income, the report found.

Achim Steiner, the UN under-secretary general and executive director of the UNEP, said: “Decoupling growth from environmental degradation is the number one challenge facing governments in a world of rising numbers of people, rising incomes, rising consumption demands and the persistent challenge of poverty alleviation.”

The panel, which drew on numerous studies including the Millennium ecosystem assessment, cites the following pressures on the environment as priorities for governments around the world: climate change, habitat change, wasteful use of nitrogen and phosphorus in fertilisers, over-exploitation of fisheries, forests and other resources, invasive species, unsafe drinking water and sanitation, lead exposure, urban air pollution and occupational exposure to particulate matter.

Agriculture, particularly meat and dairy products, accounts for 70% of global freshwater consumption, 38% of the total land use and 19% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, says the report, which has been launched to coincide with UN World Environment day on Saturday.

Prof Hertwich, who is also the director of the industrial ecology programme at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, said that developing countries – where much of this population growth will take place – must not follow the western world’s pattern of increasing consumption: “Developing countries should not follow our model. But it’s up to us to develop the technologies in, say, renewable energy or irrigation methods.”

There has been a LOT of confusion in this process, Pat—- unavoidably so, with the meanings of words being deliberately obscured and many facets of our history buried in reams of the most boring verbiage on Earth.

But….here is the skinny of it all, as delved out from the public records we have.

The Forefathers established nation-states in each of the colonies. Nations are political entities composed of members of Jural Assemblies— unincorporated associations of people who join together for the purpose of defining and enforcing local law— and in our case, that means the Common Law of the land, because our nation-states and our jural assemblies are all land-based and this is the form of law that our Forefathers chose to operate the land jurisdiction.

States are also political entities “standing for” those nations, created for the purpose of administration of public works and trusteeship of public resources. So you have the nation, a political entity structured as an unincorporated association of free people acting as a Jural Assembly to define and enforce the law, and you have the state, which is entrusted with providing public services and trusteeship of public property which is owned “in common”.

The word “state” has another meaning, too, which is the geographic territory in which the members of the state jural assembly lives and over which their authority extends.

A “county” is similarly structured. The word can stand for the organization charged with administration of public works and trusteeship of public resources within the boundaries of the geographic territory, or it can mean the literal geographic territory in which the county jural assembly lives and over which their authority extends.

In the American System, generally speaking, townships make up counties, counties make up states, and the political power vested in these organic states and their living people forming their jural assemblies flows upward—- from the bottom up, not the top down.

These American nation-states which occupy the land mass of our country are all organized as–literally– separate countries within the “perpetual” Union of States created by The Articles of Confederation (1781). This is how the nation-states on the land are organized and how they have always been organized. There has been no change in this basic concept and structure since 1781.

Contrary to popular misinformation, the adoption of The Constitution(s) nearly a decade later had nothing to do with and did not destroy, amend, or replace The Articles of Confederation nor affect the Union of States created by The Articles of Confederation.

The Constitution adopted by the States of America just described is called, appropriately enough, “The Constitution for the united States of America”.

A “constitution” is by definition a “debt agreement or contract”, and in this case, it memorialized a contract for services between the States and the new “Federal Government” they organized as means to provide these “services in common” and which acknowledged the debt that the original States incurred as a result.

The States farmed out some of their work to the federal entity they created, and in exchange, those services were standardized within all the participating States. The agreement resulted in establishing a common defense, a common form of money, a common trade policy, and so on. ALL of the duties assigned to the new “federal government” were international in nature. The States retained all authority related to their land jurisdiction. Period.

Please note that the “federal government” created was a voluntary association of independent nation-states and was never a sovereign government at all.

Once this new association of the States of America was created and adopted–on top of and in addition to and not in any way competing with the Union of States created by The Articles of Confederation— the service contract became operative and the “federal government” began providing the mutually agreed-upon “governmental services” the associated States contracted to receive and pay for.

The Federal Government was and is a subcontractor of the States of America. It has no other business being here, and since we and our States of America created the “Federal Government” we retain the right to amend its service contract, renegotiate its service contract, or terminate its service contract at will.

As part of its services contract, the Federal Government is required to protect and defend our National Trust, known as the United States Trust. This is set forth in the Preamble of The Constitution and was further elucidated by the Bill of Rights.

The organization thus created and popularly known as the Federal Government has no duties related to the land jurisdiction of the United States, except the “Interstate Commerce Clause” provision which exists merely to “regulate” and expedite free trade between the independent nation-states in the same way that the Federal Government is supposed to regulate and expedite American free trade with and among all the other nations of the world.

Please note that because the Federal Government’s duties are all international in nature, it functions naturally in the international jurisdiction of the sea and under the Law of the Sea—–not the Law of the Land. The only form of “common law” available to the Federal Government is international Martial Common Law. When federal officials and agencies refer to The Constitution as the “Law of the Land” they mean that literally, as in the foreign law of our separate and natural jurisdiction on the land—- it’s our Law that they have to respect when they come ashore on our soil. Please also note that the Federal Jurisdiction created by The Constitution is operated from the top down, not from the bottom up. It depends on executive power being exercised to direct all of its activities.

What has occurred here has been a gradual usurpation by the Federal Government which is now operated via two huge international “governmental services corporations” —- THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. fronted by the FEDERAL RESERVE, INC. and the UNITED STATES, INC., fronted by the IMF.

Various semantic deceits based on similar or even identical names being used to promote fraud against the States of America and the American People have been employed by these corporations and their managers. Chief among these frauds have been the creation of “federated states, counties, and municipalities”.

The two giant federal service corporations made a successful bid to co-opt the organizations that were providing us with State and County level services. They promised the State and County organizations a cut of “federal revenue sharing” in exchange for all of them incorporating as franchises—- like Dairy Queen franchises. This was done as a “private business deal” without public announcement or permission or plebiscite, and it has had profound adverse results.

The Checks and Balances upon which our lawful government depends have been eradicated. Instead of the “State” and “County” organizations representing the interests of the States of America and the American People, they have been commandeered to represent the interests of the parent “federal” corporations instead. This has been done via the simple act of incorporating.

Whenever you incorporate anything, you take it straight off the jurisdiction of the land and out from under the Law of the Land and set sail in the international jurisdiction of the sea. This is how our Constitution has been side-stepped by these organizations and the way that improper fraudulent claims have been exercised against the land and the people of the States of America.

Now, finally getting to your question, Pat—- what about all these new organizations running around and claiming to “be” the legitimate government? We’ve got Tim Turner’s “Republic of the united States of America (RuSA)” and we’ve got Russell Gould’s “Unity States of the World” and we’ve got the French “Neu Republique” and it seems that absolutely everyone has “offered” to stand in for our government, but the fact remains that this is a government of the people, by the people and for the people—- and that means that we actually have to show up and do the work of governing ourselves.

The last few years have been like that old television show—- “Will the real United States of America please stand up?”

The problem with all the aforementioned groups is that they have all concentrated on seizing power from the criminally mismanaged governmental services corporations instead of concentrating on restoring the lawful government from the ground up. They all want to walk onto center stage, claim the baton, and continue to repeat the same mistakes with whatever variations. And that doesn’t solve the real problem which is ignorance of who we are and how our government is supposed to work: from the bottom up.

The fact of the matter is that under international law, each and every birthright American State National IS the government. We are all nation-states, sovereigns, and a law unto ourselves. That is the true brilliance of our Forefathers. As long as we know who we are, we call the shots. As long as there is even one American left standing to exercise The Constitution against these rats, the Last Man Standing Rule applies. So, here we are, exercising the Last Man Standing Rule and forcing all this crap to be dug out from under the rug and dealt with once and for all.

Last November we entered a national crisis with hardly anyone being aware of it. Having failed to establish “exclusive legislative rule” and having no excuse for their fraudulent claims and criminal activities on our shores, the IMF doing business as the UNITED STATES, Inc. let the governmental services corporation go insolvent and prepared to liquidate its assets. They did this without naming any Successor to contract. That led to the “federal side” of The Constitution being “vacated” for the first time in over 200 years.

They actually thought that they could pull this off. They thought they could come in here and “pull an FDR” and claim all the land and assets of the States of America and the American People as payment for their private corporate debts. They thought they could “dispense with” the actual Constitution and its guarantees and come in here and rape and pillage at will. The banks were in full hue and cry. Their operatives claimed before the UN Security Council and the UN Trust Committees that we no longer exist, that we no longer had “international representation”, that we had no “national currency in circulation”.

So, we formed a new contract agreement with the Native American Nations to represent the States of America and the American People in fulfillment of The Constitution for the united States of America. We issued new Sovereign Letters Patent in rebuttal of the banks and we issued a new Declaration of Joint Sovereignty.

That instantly put the resources and people of the Indigenous Nations on the playing board and on our side. These nations, the Athabascan Nation and the Lakota Nation, are recognized internationally, are members of the United Nations, have more than 15 million members, are competent to fulfill the “federal” side of The Constitution contract, and have agreed to do so.

For the first time in more than three centuries, the American People as a whole have the opportunity to stand together and rule their own destiny on the land and on the sea. We stuck our fingers in the dyke, but it is up to everyone to now work to repair our lawful government and expose the fraud and mismanagement and breach of trust that landed our country in this situation.

All of this is heading toward an inevitable national plebiscite in which the facts are all finally disclosed to everyone and in which each one of us decides the fate of our nation. Meantime, the necessary work of restoring the lawful government on the land has begun. In every corner, township and county, Jural Assemblies are forming and the county level governments owed to the land jurisdiction are booting up.

This, finally, is our government coming from the bottom up, the government of the people, by the people and for the people. This is profoundly not an insurrection. It’s a restoration.

What about the “STATE” and “COUNTY” governments presently operating as franchises of these huge multi-national banking cartels? There’s no need to fight with them. They are just franchises like Dairy Queen franchises of an insolvent parent corporation on one hand (UNITED STATES, Inc.) and another governmental services corporation (THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Inc.) that doesn’t have a valid contract on the other.

Are we supposed to fight with Dairy Queen? Over what? New flavors of ice cream?

No, all that is necessary is that Americans wake up and remember who they are, and start operating their own government the way their government is supposed to work: unincorporated States and Counties operating the land jurisdiction of this nation as a check and a balance against the incorporated Federal Government charged with operations in the international jurisdiction of the sea.

As part of this process we will have the opportunity to call a Continental Congress and review The Contract. We now know, for example, that allowing the United States Congress to have plenary control of the District of Columbia was a mistake. There are several such “holes” in The Constitution that need plugging. Ultimately, the People and their States of America may see fit to amend, rewrite, restructure, or even destroy the existing Constitution in favor of a new consolidated structure that better protects and enunciates the sacredness of each Man and Woman and which provides less leeway for public employees to go astray.

Whatever happens, I know this much: the American People are now awake and thinking about all this like never before, and that process is not likely to reverse. God bless America.

Today, I will address Daresh’s “Information”— which should rightly be titled, “Disinformation” issued a couple days ago. I quote:

Daresh: “This brings us to the main purpose of this Information: Government agent provocateurs have been fueling a quasi-shadow government movement that essentially advocates the overthrow of the government.”

Anna: What government? A corporation run by international banking cartels is not our government, is it? In fact, a corporation doesn’t actually have the capacity to act as a sovereign government at all and we are merely stretching euphemism beyond its limit to pretend that it does.

Daresh: People in this movement, led by de facto Judge Anna Von Reitz, de facto Judge Bruce Doucette and de facto god-graced Administrator Joaquin Folch, who have taken on these self-appointed titles, are duping people from the liberty movements looking for a solution to the subversion within our government who, being ignorant of the law, fall prey to the Pied Pipers .

Anna: There are no “self-appointed titles” involved including “Pied Piper” and nothing “de facto” about it. Everything we’ve done is firmly based on existing Law. We are filling vacated public offices that are owed to our own de jure government. When we offered to show Daresh the facts, he wouldn’t look. His response was rump in the air, head in the sand. So there he sits, ignorant as ever, making irresponsible accusations. NLA deserves far, far better leadership, thank you.

Read the Foreign Sovereigns Immunities Act (FSIA) and the International Organizations Immunities Act (IOIA) for yourselves and then read my explanation of how all this happened in the “Common Law vs. Admiralty Law” article posted at www.annavonreitz.com.

Daresh: Many who are following these de facto judges, actually believe them to be properly elected or appointed.

Anna: We are properly elected Common Law Judges but Daresh mistakenly thinks that we are “supposed to be” Admiralty Judges instead. He expected me to be a Bar Attorney—-that’s how far behind the curve he really is. “Oh, look, Dick, there’s a squirrel…..no, Jane, it’s a cat with a fluffy tail….”

Daresh: Even we thought for a while that Anna Von Reitz was an Alaskan Supreme Court Judge. We spent many months attempting to verify whether she was even a real person.

Anna: Hahahahahahah! I have been here in the same spot since 1992 as thousands of people who have contacted me directly and honestly can confirm. The key words here are “honestly and directly”.

I sent Daresh an original wet-ink copy of our American Affidavit of Probable Cause complete with all my contact information last July and I have the mailing receipts to prove it. Did he call me? No. Did he email me? No. Did he write me a letter? No. Ask me any questions? No.

Let’s just say all those “months” they tried so hard to “verify” my existence could have been settled with a phone call and weren’t. Daresh wasn’t looking for me. He was trying to avoid me and to avoid taking action on our affidavit.

Daresh: But, when she finally surfaced……

Anna: Yeah, right, as if I was hiding. That’s why I issue all my documents, books, articles, everything, with current contact information?

Daresh: …..We saw that she was connected to this quasi-shadow government movement that we have been hearing about; but we had yet to identify the people who are part of this movement until now. We believe the leaders of this movement are fueled by government agent provocateurs.

Anna: Daresh is so clueless that he appears not to know what the “shadow government” is or what the phrase means—- let me enlighten him (and everyone else who needs to know). The Shadow Government was put in place by FDR many long years ago. It refers to all the appointed offices and agencies that have been promulgating their own rules —like the FBI and FEMA and IRS and DHS— and then left to run rampant over the people who pay their wages.

This “government by political appointment” is the “Shadow Government” — as defined by those who first coined the term back in the 1930’s and 40’s. —-and not coincidentally, it was the “Shadow Government” that murdered LaVoy Finicum.

All those so senselessly and groundlessly accused—myself, Judge Doucette, and the others— not only support the Common Law Grand Jury Movement, we are committed to restoring the entire American Common Law Court System.

Anyone who supports the resurrection of the Common Law Grand Juries ought to, as a matter of logic and principle, also support the restoration of the American Common Law Court System that gave the CLGJ’s birth and meaning and enforcement in this country for over 350 years.

But not John Daresh.

He wants to pretend that the restoration of our own Common Law Court System including the Common Law Grand Jury portion of it —-is a plot, an attempt to “overthrow the government”. What a Logic Failure. Grade “F”.

There are a number of reasons why our effort to restore our entire court system cannot be construed as any act of “insurrection” or attempt to “overthrow” any government.

First, there’s the plain fact that we haven’t advocated any such thing.

Second, there’s the fact that no foreign corporation is competent to act as a sovereign government with respect to us and these United States, so the concept of “insurrection” doesn’t apply.

Third, there’s the fact that just as we are heir to the Common Law Grand Jury we are heir to the entire American Common Law Court System as well. If we are owed one part of it, we are owed the whole of it.

The many good people associated with NLA who are trying to restore the Common Law Grand Juries don’t deserve “leadership” that tells lies and causes trouble, nor do they need a truncated vision that leaves their Grand Juries spinning their wheels, going nowhere.

The simple fact is that the Grand Juries are meant to be part of the whole American Common Law Court System and without the whole Court functioning in support of their actions, the Grand Juries are about as useless as a windmill on a still day. They can hand down presentments and informations and writs until they are blue in the face and have nothing to show for their effort but a thank you from John Daresh.

This is what we are trying to tell NLA, and if you stop and think about it, you will realize that what we are telling you is true.

The Founders divided the power even more. They set the limited power the Constitution grants the “general authority,” Madison’s term for the federal government, against the vast residual powers of the states.

Each sphere of government, state and federal, would be supreme in its own sphere. Neither could control

the other. Each protects itself from intervention by the other. Each has its own laws and rules.

Madison says this: “Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over

the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which

the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier

against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government

With Q3 of the 2015 fiscal year just around the corner, one cannot help but notice unprecedented unease in both financial and social spheres, and perhaps with good reason; with alternative media forecasters, national banks, and supranational institutions alike heralding the coming of “global depression” by the end of 2016, this consensus of seemingly strange bedfellows almost universally agree that something wicked this way comes.

These dire economic prognostications exist simultaneously in a world in which energy and development prospects, both nationally and transnationally, are being reworked – with equally profound implications as the aforementioned financial trend analysis.

Be it the Obama Administration’s “Clean Power Plan” or the EU and China’s planned Neomalthusian 2030 carbon emission cutbacks, national entities the world over are positioning themselves for profound shifts in energy, development, trade, and even currency ahead of COP21 in Paris this December, or as some have deemed it, “Agenda 2030.”

The convergence of both engineered economic crisis and an engineered “sustainable development” crisis in late-2015 are hardly coincidental, nor are they insignificant.

While the alternative finance community seems destined to eternally squabble about the mechanics of a coming global depression, few have set themselves to the task of projecting what the character of such a post-depression society will look like – and the “New World Economic Order” it has the potential to initiate.

It is this author’s contention that the character of this coming era can only be understood when financial calamity is viewed in tandem with Agenda 21’s faux-ecological insidiousness; and you, Reader, deserve the knowledge and documentation of this sagacious plot.

It’s pervasive, it’s global, and has existed (in its modern form) since at least the 1970s.

Seeking to contextualize this historical continuity, we must first examine the writings of erudite anti-Technocracy researcher, Patrick Wood, and his pioneering work on the Trilateral Commission’s “New International Economic Order” of the 1970s.

Technocracy and the “New International Economic Order”

As an integral decade in this ongoing “Age of Transitions,” the 1970s brought with it previously unimagined sociopolitical and economic shifts. Deflation was prevalent.

The decade also saw the rise of the Petrodollar and the end of the gold-backed Bretton Woods era, as well as the seeding of eugenic “environmental catastrophe” memes propagated by works like the Club of Rome’s 1972 publication, Limits to Growth, or John P. Holdren’s equally Neomalthusian and lauded Ecoscience.

It also saw the birth of the Trilateral Commission, co-founded by David Rockefeller and Zbignew Brzezinski in 1973, who, among other things, pushed forth the concept of a “New International Economic Order” to quell the world’s ailing economic and environmental “doom and gloom” forecasts.

While the nature of this “New International Economic Order” at the time evaded Mr. Wood and his research partner, Dr. Antony Sutton, the perspective granted by the passage of time has lead Patrick Wood to declare Technocracy to be the true aim of this New Order. He writes:

“It is plainly evident today, with 40 years of historical examination behind it, that the “New International Economic Order” was really “new” and envisioned historic Technocracy as replacing Capitalism altogether. Technocracy was based on energy rather than money and its system of supply and demand that regulates pricing. Some distinctives of Technocracy include:

• Elimination of private property and wealth accumulation • Replacing traditional education with workforce training • Micromanaging all energy distribution and consumption • Driving people to live in a limited number of cities and off of rural land • Enforcing a balance between nature’s resources and man’s consumption of them.

“Are you thinking that this list is vaguely familiar? You should, because it represents the modern manifestation of programs like Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, Smart Growth, Smart Grid, Cap And Trade, Climate Change, Common Core, massive surveillance operations and a whole lot more. All of this has been brought to us by the machinations of the Trilateral Commission and its members since 1973, and it is all part of its master plan to completely replace capitalism with Technocracy. This is their “New International Economic Order“! — Patrick Wood, Endgame of Technocracy (Patrick Wood’s book, Technocracy Rising, is available on Amazon).

The Trilateral Commission, however, was not alone in the propagation of the “New International Economic Order” ideal. As with all things global and “sustainable,” the United Nations is sure to be lurking nearby.

The UN’s “Council on Trade and Development” (or UNCTAD) was the chief multinational institution (in cooperation with the Trilateral Commission) in proudly promoting such a New Order throughout the decade:

As noted in my previous article about COP21 and the coming Agenda 21 “update,” documentation on what this “binding and legal agreement” entails directly from UN sources related to the Conference is sparse; that is, until one abandons searching for literature on the “green” facade and goes straight to the source of the “New International Economic Order” itself – that is, global trade governance, as documented by UNCTAD

It is within UNCTAD’s 2015 policy briefs that we begin to find some semblance of clarity as to what a post-global depression geopolitical and economic environment has in store for us; and as all burgeoning Hegelians know, global problems invite (engineered) global solutions.

UNCTAD and the “Sustainable Multilateral” Vision of Humanity

Over the past 40 years, the “New International Economic Order” has changed its name and structure, but never its primary objectives. Its old name cast away in favor of representing our increasingly captive and globalized world, “Multilateral Global Trade Governance” is its new moniker.

The threats of population bombs, peak oil, and Global Cooling prevalent in the ’70s, too, have given way to the phantom foes of carbon emissions and “unsustainability” so overtly propagandized to us in the 21st Century.

In true Technocratic fashion, UNCTAD declares the new face of “transformative” and “multilateral” global governance to be underpinned by none other than sustainable development in their 2015 Policy Brief No. 31:

This new form of globalism is slated to be seemingly inclusive, allowing nations like China, Russia, India, and Brazil some measure of regional control, while ultimately being subservient to the “binding and legal agreement” of COP21. Continuing with Policy Brief No. 31

We see that these new “inclusive multilateral mechanisms” are anything but voluntary, as UNCTAD goes on to conclude that such mechanisms would “preclude competitive liberalization;” in other words, multilateralism is designed to prevent Second and Third World nations from seeking a development structure outside the UN’s “sustainable” vision.

If any are still in doubt as to whether the BRICS alliance and its New Development Bank represent this globalist multilateral trap, UNCTAD steadfastly declare the BRICS to be an integral regional component in this plot:

This latest forecast echoes UNCTAD’s 2014 publication, A BRICS Development Bank: A Dream Coming True? which also holds the BRICS NDB as a key partner in Agenda 21 and its global Technocratic serfdom, written about at length by this author previously.

This bank-against-bank dialectic is the Globalist version of Coke vs. Pepsi. Republicans vs. Democrats. East vs. West. BRICS Bank vs. World Bank. Multilateral vs. Monopolar. All result in the synthesis of “global trade governance” aspired to by the Anglo-American Establishment and Agenda 21.

In UNCTAD’s Policy Brief on Climate Change No. 4, the structure of this new system of governance was enumerated upon by none other than Chinese (Editorial Correction: S. Korean) UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon. If his description does not represent “multilateral globalism,” I don’t know what does:

Supposedly sovereign nations will be subservient to regional entities (BRICS, NAFTA, EU, etc). Regional entities will abide by a commonly agreed upon set of global development and economic standards (COP21).

“And what of the individual,” one may ponder? Such an “outmoded” concept has no place in the eternal Cybernetic feedback loop of “green” global trade governance as outlined by UNCTAD:

The aforementioned “knowledge sharing,” “peer reviewing,” and “accountability” standards will be handled not wholly by governing bodies, but governing algorithms, as such banal tasks are likely to be managed by our increasingly “smart” cities, metering devices, homes, and cars; a shift destined to portend the increased control such devices will bring to everyday life within this “New Multilateral Economic Order.”

It is unlikely that such sweeping alterations to global as well as social interaction will take place unless “motivated” by periods of crisis. In UNCTAD’s Policy Brief No. 36, the importance of our last global crisis of 2008 in creating the prerequisites for “Green” Globalism is noted:

It therefore stands to reason that the activation of these bilateral, regional, and megaregional trade agreements created in the wake of the 2008 Depression will likewise require economic calamity to activate; calamity that alternative media and the Bank for International Settlements alike are predicting as inevitable.

If such a “transformative” global structure is to be initiated in advance of or around COP21 this December, the remainder of 2015 is likely to be wrought with continued economic uncertainty.

The brief goes on to note a number of transnational corporations complying with this new Green Globalism, some of whom should be familiar to the astute Deep Political reader and researcher:

“In the same time period, China rose from the 30th-largest target of US R&D investment to the 11th on the back of a doubling of US affiliates in the country. The list of companies that started major R&D activities or facilities in China in the 1990s reads like a who’s who of the CFR-nested Fortune 500 set: DuPont, Ford, General Electric, General Motors, IBM, Intel, Lucent Technologies, Microsoft, Motorola, and Rohm and Haas all had a significant stake in China by the beginning of the 21st century.” — James Corbett, The Great Decoupling: How the West is Engineering its Own Downfall

So it would seem this same set of “CFR-nested Fortune 500” companies responsible for building up China’s industrial and technological capacity are now pushing forth sustainable development with the UN as well as within the BRICS nations themselves.

Have these Western entities bolstered China’s modern economic stature out of sheer goodwill? Merely self-interested profiteering? Or is the fulfillment of this greater collectivist agenda the “quid pro quo” demanded by the West in exchange for such niceties as increased regional power in the Asia-Pacific?

This year’s demise of the BRICS economies (most notably China) as well as key Western markets, if not overtly coordinated, certainly provide a unique opportunity to bring about these proposed “global (green) solutions” to “global crises.”

In Closing

As this blog has set out to demonstrate since its inception, globalism is indeed what its title claims – global. It knows no borders, nations, or ideologies, save complete and utter transnational subjugation of autonomous human beings – globally.

Technocracy – rule by a class of entrenched elites and “snitch society” technologies – will be the character of this coming global era. Sustainable development (Agenda 21) is its vehicle.

It doesn’t reach the “End of the Road” without a transition from the “Old Economic World Order” to the New, a divergence impossible without a global economic crisis the likes of which has not been seen in nearly a Century.

“What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude the principal risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? In order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring this about?

“This group of world leaders forms a secret society to bring about an economic collapse. It’s February. They’re all at Davos. These aren’t terrorists. They’re world leaders. They have positioned themselves in the world’s commodities and stock markets.

“They’ve engineered, using their access to stock markets and computers and gold supplies, a panic. Then, they prevent the world’s stock markets from closing. They jam the gears. They hire mercenaries who hold the leaders at Davos as hostage. The markets can’t close.” — Maurice Strong

Strong abruptly ended his tale by concluding that he “probably shouldn’t be saying things like this.” Not that he had to continue, as from where we stand in 2015, we can see how this tale ends: With Strong’s world on the horizon.

The next engineered economic crisis, ready to be sprung with a proverbial “flip of the switch,” will certainly be a global one. Yet Strong’s fantasies of Davos hostage takings of over twenty years ago may prove entirely unnecessary at COP21 in our modern era, as nearly all opposition to Agenda 21 on the global stage has been subsumed by its promise of complete technological control and a seat at the “multilateral table.”

You, though, Reader, have no seat at this table. An ostensibly insignificant cog in an international machine; but armed with the knowledge of what is to come, perhaps a cog that may someday soon decide to grind to a halt. This machine, after all, is each and every one of us.

WHAT REAL PATRIOT’S DO

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from his government." -Thomas Paine

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out...without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, and intolerable.” FL. Hamer